Latest news with #USStrike
Fox News
04-07-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
New Cold War?: US faces long-term battle to contain Iran after Trump's strike on their nuclear facilities
After Trump's strategic strike on Iran's nuclear facilities, Twelve days of air raids, missile exchanges, and brinksmanship between Israel and Iran have ended in a precarious ceasefire. Brokered by the United States, the truce has temporarily halted a conflict that threatened to spiral into a regional war involving U.S. forces, energy markets, and global nonproliferation norms. Now that the dust has settled, the critical question emerges: What was the true purpose of America's decision to strike Iran's nuclear infrastructure? And what should our strategic posture be moving forward? The True Motive Behind the Strike President Trump claimed the strikes were necessary because Iran was "weeks away" from producing a nuclear weapon. In a televised address, he said Iran could complete a bomb in "a couple of weeks" if it chose to. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt echoed the urgency: "Iran could produce [a nuclear weapon] in just weeks." Yet Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard testified in March 2025 that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon and had not resumed warhead development, despite its stockpile of enriched uranium. After Trump publicly contradicted her—"She's wrong," he said—Gabbard later amended her position to reflect the administration's concern, noting that Iran could produce a weapon "within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly." In essence, Iran had crossed the nuclear threshold—possessing enough highly enriched uranium to build a bomb—but hadn't done so. The strike, therefore, wasn't meant to neutralize an imminent weapon but to deny Iran near-term build options. It was a pre-emptive move, based on strategy, not panic. That calculation has come under renewed scrutiny. A leaked Defense Intelligence Agency memo suggested the U.S. strikes may have only "briefly delayed" Iran's nuclear program—contradicting Trump's claim that it had been "obliterated." But the CIA, in a statement from Director John Ratcliffe, countered that intelligence shows several key nuclear facilities were destroyed and would take years to rebuild. This jaw-dropping conclusion validates America's strategic choice and underscored that the operation dealt a severe, long-term blow to Iran's breakout potential. No path to peace—only a Cold War Despite chatter about diplomacy, a formal peace between Israel and Iran remains far-fetched. Since 1979, Tehran has refused to recognize Israel's existence. Its regime views Israel as illegitimate and calls for its destruction. Israel, in turn, sees Iran as an existential threat, fueled by nuclear ambition and a global network of proxies. These dynamics remain unchanged. During the NATO summit, President Trump publicly rebuked Israel's internal politics—criticizing Prime Minister Netanyahu's corruption trial as a "witch hunt," hinting at possible U.S. reconsideration of military support. This public intrusion into Israeli domestic affairs highlights how deeply U.S. influence now extends beyond the battlefield. Given these entrenched positions, the most likely outcome is not reconciliation but a prolonged standoff—akin to a modern Cold War. Proxy skirmishes, cyberattacks, and covert operations are likely to define the coming years. Stability will rest on deterrence, not diplomatic optimism. The limits of peace talks International actors—especially the UN and EU—are expected to push for new peace talks and arms-control frameworks. Such diplomacy is laudable, but expectations must be tempered. Iran has already indicated it will not rejoin IAEA inspections without substantial concessions. Israel insists on striking preemptively if it detects renewed threats. The most we can realistically hope for are temporary confidence-building measures—enrichment caps, missile constraints, or localized de-escalation. These are fragile progressions—not true peace treaties. President Trump has announced that U.S. officials will meet with their Iranian counterparts "next week" to discuss nuclear concerns and regional stability. While the announcement signals a shift toward engagement, the administration's ongoing tensions with the intelligence community—combined with Iran's entrenched ideological stance—cast doubt on the prospects for any enduring diplomatic breakthrough. A realistic path forward The best strategic objective now is not peace, but stability. That means a policy of managed containment: Conclusion Contrary to initial claims, President Trump's strike was not about ending an immediate nuclear threat but about denying Iran any rapid pathway to one. The CIA's confirmation that Iran's key nuclear sites were destroyed and will take years to rebuild supports this strategy. Peace with Iran remains a far-off dream. Instead, America must brace for a prolonged, asymmetric contest—driven by proxy struggles, cyber tensions, and ideological rivalries. The ceasefire may hold, but the war is not over. Real victory lies not in treaties or summits, but in steady deterrence, disciplined diplomacy, and clear-eyed strategic patience.
Daily Mail
26-06-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Leavitt says 'no indication' Iran moved enriched uranium
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt issued yet another declarative statement that the Iranians weren't able to spirit away its supply of enriched uranium before the massive U.S. strike on its concealed Fordow facilty. Leavitt spoke to the state of Iran 's nuclear program hours after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth once again lectured reporters for publishing initial conclusions of a Defense Intelligence Agency analysis that said the strike may have just knocked back Iran's nuclear program by a few months. Leavitt picked up where Hegseth left off, ripping CNN reporter who authored a story about the initial assessment. 'So we were watching closely, and there was no indication to the United States that any of that enriched uranium was moved prior to the strike,' she said. She called it 'one of the most secretive and successful operations in United States history.' Hours earlier, President Donald Trump posted about satellite imagery prior to the strike that showed a line of 16 trucks on a road near the Fordow site. That has been the basis for speculation that the Iranians could have moved some of their enriched uranium – which could allow them to quickly restart a nuclear weapons program if they had access to centrifuges for further enrichment. 'The cars and small trucks at the site were those of concrete workers trying to cover up the top of the shafts. Nothing was taken out of facility. Would take too long, too dangerous, and very heavy and hard to move!' Trump wrote. That came after Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine provided Pentagon reporters with a detailed blow-by-blow of the operation, explaining that initial 'bunker bunker' bombs targeted air shafts, allowing later bombs to penetrate deeper and deeper into the mountain facility. Leavitt also attacked the media for reporting on an early 'low confidence' classified Defense Intelligence Agency analysis of the strike. He rolled out a lengthy attack on CNN reporter Natasha Bertrand, who authored one of the stories about it. She brought up stories the reporter wrote back to 2020, including one on the COVID lab leak theory and another on what she called the 'suckers and losers' hoax. 'I believe the FBI is investigating to find out who that leaker was, because it's illegal and they should be held accountable for that leaked bits and pieces of an Intel assessment to push a false narrative.' 'And it's to the same reporter, I will add, Natasha Bertrand of CNN, who has done this in the past. In 2020 it was Natasha Bertrand who had 51 intelligence analysts falsely lied to her, but she still put it on paper for some reason, that the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation ... Also in 2020 this same reporter, Natasha Bertrand, wrote that a top Intel agency ruled out the man-made lab leak theory of the Coronavirus origins. Again, the President was right about that,' she said, listing other stories by the reporter. CNN defended Bertrand earlier after Trump went after her. 'We stand 100 percent behind Natasha Bertrand's journalism and specifically her and her colleagues' reporting of the early intelligence assessment of the U.S. attack on Iran's nuclear facilities,' it said in a statement. 'CNN's reporting made clear that this was an initial finding that could change with additional intelligence. We have extensively covered President Trump's own deep skepticism about it.' Ayatollah Ali Khamenei reemerged to deliver a taped statement in front of brown curtains to declare that the attack 'could not achieve anything significant.' Leavitt dismissed his account. 'Look, we saw the Ayatollah's video. And when you have a totalitarian regime, you have to save face. I think any common sense, open minded person knows the truth about these precision strikes on Saturday night. They were wildly successful,' she said. On Tuesday, Vice President JD Vance told Fox News that Iran's cache of 800 pounds of enriched uranium that is short of weapons-grade could still be intact. He said it's location 'is not the question before us' and said the real question is: 'Can Iran enrich the uranium to weapons-grade level and can they convert that fuel into a nuclear weapon?' 'We are going to work in the coming weeks to ensure that we do something with that fuel and that's one of the things that we're going to have conversations with the Iranians about,' Vance told ABC's This Week on Sunday. 'The goal was to bury the uranium, and I do think the uranium is buried,' he said. Amid the uncertainty, one possibility raised by experts is that the Iranian regime has moved nuclear material to yet another site, 'Pickaxe mountain.' Previous satellite images have shown heavy construction at Pickaxe, and Iran reportedly dismissed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) when asked what was occurring in the bowels of the mountain 90 miles south of Fordow. Hegseth also attested to the success of the operation in burying Iran's enriched uranium, before getting in a tense-exchange with Jennifer Griffin of Fox News. 'There's nothing that I've seen that suggests that what we didn't hit exactly what we wanted to hit in those locations,' Hegseth siad. 'That's not the question, though. It's about highly enriched uranium. Do you have certainty that all the highly enriched uranium was inside the Fordow mountain, or some of it?' Griffin followed up. 'There were satellite photos that showed more than a dozen trucks there two days in advance. Are you certain none of that highly enriched uranium was moved?' That prompted Hegseth to attack the reporter. 'Of course, we're watching every single aspect,' he said. 'But Jennifer, you've been about the worst, the one who misrepresents the most intentionally what the President says.' She then defended her record and pointed prior reporting about the B-2 bomber mission that targeted Fordow.
Daily Mail
26-06-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Karoline Leavitt says CNN reporter should be 'ashamed' as she details what REALLY happened with Iran's enriched uranium in strikes
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt issued yet another declarative statement that the Iranians weren't able to spirit away its supply of enriched uranium before the massive U.S. strike on its concealed Fordow facilty. Leavitt spoke to the state of Iran 's nuclear program hours after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth once again lectured reporters for publishing initial conclusions of a Defense Intelligence Agency analysis that said the strike may have just knocked back Iran's nuclear program by a few months. Leavitt picked up where Hegseth left off, ripping CNN reporter who authored a story about the initial assessment. 'So we were watching closely, and there was no indication to the United States that any of that enriched uranium was moved prior to the strike,' she said. She called it 'one of the most secretive and successful operations in United States history.' Hours earlier, President Donald Trump posted about satellite imagery prior to the strike that showed a line of 16 trucks on a road near the Fordow site. That has been the basis for speculation that the Iranians could have moved some of their enriched uranium – which could allow them to quickly restart a nuclear weapons program if they had access to centrifuges for further enrichment. 'The cars and small trucks at the site were those of concrete workers trying to cover up the top of the shafts. Nothing was taken out of facility. Would take too long, too dangerous, and very heavy and hard to move!' Trump wrote. That came after Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine provided Pentagon reporters with a detailed blow-by-blow of the operation, explaining that initial 'bunker bunker' bombs targeted air shafts, allowing later bombs to penetrate deeper and deeper into the mountain facility. Leavitt also attacked the media for reporting on an early 'low confidence' classified Defense Intelligence Agency analysis of the strike. He rolled out a lengthy attack on CNN reporter Natasha Bertrand, who authored one of the stories about it. She brought up stories the reporter wrote back to 2020, including one on the COVID lab leak theory and another on what she called the 'suckers and losers' hoax. 'I believe the FBI is investigating to find out who that leaker was, because it's illegal and they should be held accountable for that leaked bits and pieces of an Intel assessment to push a false narrative,' 'And it's to the same reporter, I will add, Natasha Bertrand of CNN, who has done this in the past. In 2020 it was Natasha Bertrand who had 51 intelligence analysts falsely lied to her, but she still put it on paper for some reason, that the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation ... Also in 2020 this same reporter, Natasha Bertrand, wrote that a top Intel agency ruled out the man-made lab leak theory of the Coronavirus origins. Again, the President was right about that,' she said, listing other stories by the reporter. CNN defended Bertrand earlier after Trump went after her. 'We stand 100 percent behind Natasha Bertrand's journalism and specifically her and her colleagues' reporting of the early intelligence assessment of the U.S. attack on Iran's nuclear facilities,' it said in a statement. 'CNN's reporting made clear that this was an initial finding that could change with additional intelligence. We have extensively covered President Trump's own deep skepticism about it.' Ayatollah Ali Khamenei reemerged to deliver a taped statement in front of brown curtains to declare that the attack 'could not achieve anything significant.' Leavitt dismissed his account. 'Look, we saw the Ayatollah's video. And when you have a totalitarian regime, you have to save face. I think any common sense, open minded person knows the truth about these precision strikes on Saturday night. They were wildly successful,' she said. On Tuesday, Vice President JD Vance told Fox News that Iran's cache of 800 pounds of enriched uranium that is short of weapons-grade could still be intact. He said it's location 'is not the question before us' and said the real question is: 'Can Iran enrich the uranium to weapons-grade level and can they convert that fuel into a nuclear weapon?' 'We are going to work in the coming weeks to ensure that we do something with that fuel and that's one of the things that we're going to have conversations with the Iranians about,' Vance told ABC's This Week on Sunday. 'The goal was to bury the uranium, and I do think the uranium is buried,' he said. Amid the uncertainty, one possibility raised by experts is that the Iranian regime has moved nuclear material to yet another site, 'Pickaxe mountain.' Previous satellite images have shown heavy construction at Pickaxe, and Iran reportedly dismissed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) when asked what was occurring in the bowels of the mountain 90 miles south of Fordow. Hegseth also attested to the success of the operation in burying Iran's enriched uranium, before getting in a tense-exchange with Jennifer Griffin of Fox News. 'There's nothing that I've seen that suggests that what we didn't hit exactly what we wanted to hit in those locations,' Hegseth siad. 'That's not the question, though. It's about highly enriched uranium. Do you have certainty that all the highly enriched uranium was inside the Fordow mountain, or some of it?' Griffin followed up. 'There were satellite photos that showed more than a dozen trucks there two days in advance. Are you certain none of that highly enriched uranium was moved?' That prompted Hegseth to attack the reporter. 'Of course, we're watching every single aspect,' he said. 'But Jennifer, you've been about the worst, the one who misrepresents the most intentionally what the President says.' She then defended her record and pointed prior reporting about the B-2 bomber mission that targeted Fordow.
LBCI
25-06-2025
- Politics
- LBCI
Rubio says Iran now 'farther away' from nuclear weapons
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Politico on Wednesday that Iran is now 'much further away from acquiring a nuclear weapon' following the U.S. strike on three major nuclear sites in Iran earlier this week. 'The bottom line is, they are much further away from having a nuclear weapon today than they were before the president took this bold action,' Rubio said. He added, 'There was significant — very significant — damage to a variety of different components, and we're continuing to receive more information about it.' Reuters
Reuters
25-06-2025
- Politics
- Reuters
Iran 'much further away' from building nuclear weapon after US strike, Rubio tells Politico
June 25 (Reuters) - U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Politico on Wednesday that Iran was "much further away from a nuclear weapon" following a U.S. strike on Tehran's three main nuclear sites over the weekend. Rubio's comments come after Reuters and others reported Tuesday that those U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities set back Tehran's program by only a matter of months, citing a preliminary U.S. intelligence assessment through sources. Both Trump and the White House rejected the assessment. The president reiterated on his Truth Social account that the Iranian nuclear sites were completely destroyed, while the White House pointed Reuters to a statement by spokesperson Karoline Leavitt to CNN, which first reported the assessment, that the "alleged" conclusion was "flat-out wrong." "The bottom line is, they are much further away from a nuclear weapon today than they were before the president took this bold action," Rubio told Politico on the sidelines of the NATO summit. "That's the most important thing to understand — significant, very significant, substantial damage was done to a variety of different components, and we're just learning more about it,' Rubio added, referring to the damage done to the Iranian nuclear sites. Rubio dismissed the media reports as "false" and said they did not capture the full picture, according to Politico. A ceasefire brokered by Trump between Iran and Israel appeared to be holding on Wednesday, a day after both countries signalled that their air war had ended. Israel launched the surprise air war on June 13, attacking Iranian nuclear facilities and killing top military commanders. Iran, which denies trying to build nuclear weapons, retaliated with barrages of missiles on Israeli military sites and cities.
