U.S. Strikes on Iran Fail to Destroy Core Nuclear Infrastructure
Trump Claims “Total Obliteration” as Intelligence Shows Only Limited Damage to Iran’s Nuclear Program
The Biden-Trump foreign policy continuum took a sharp turn toward instability last weekend when U.S. forces, under the direct order of President Donald Trump, launched a high-stakes bombing campaign targeting three of Iran’s most critical nuclear facilities. While Trump declared the mission a “total obliteration” of Iran’s nuclear capabilities, early intelligence reports tell a different story—one of cosmetic damage and strategic failure.
According to a classified Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) assessment obtained by CNN, the U.S. military’s use of 30,000-pound bunker-busting bombs at Iran’s Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear sites did not achieve its intended objective. The enriched uranium stockpiles remain intact. The underground centrifuge systems? Still operational. The supposed decapitation strike on Iran’s nuclear ambitions? A temporary setback, not a strategic win.
Aboveground Damage, Underground Resilience
U.S. officials say the strikes severely damaged power infrastructure and aboveground buildings, some of which are involved in converting uranium into bomb-grade metal. However, two sources familiar with the DIA findings confirmed that the strikes failed to penetrate the heavily fortified underground systems that form the backbone of Iran’s nuclear enrichment network.
“So the DIA assessment is that the U.S. set them back maybe a few months, tops,” one source told CNN. That flies directly in the face of President Trump’s repeated claims that Iran’s nuclear facilities had been “completely demolished.”
The White House Responds with Bluster
In typical Trump fashion, the administration responded to facts with fury. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt dismissed the report as “flat-out wrong” and accused a “low-level loser in the intelligence community” of leaking top-secret information to discredit the president.
“Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000-pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration,” Leavitt claimed—ignoring the military’s own internal analysis and the laws of physics regarding deep-earth facilities.
Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth echoed Trump’s chest-thumping rhetoric, declaring that Iran’s nuclear capabilities “have been obliterated.” But Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Dan Caine offered a more measured view, noting that it is “way too early” to know whether Iran’s nuclear program remains viable.
Israel’s View: Mixed and Muted
Israel, which carried out initial airstrikes ahead of the U.S. bombing campaign, reportedly pushed for the use of America’s bunker-buster bombs to finish the job. But even Israeli military assessments show the Fordow facility sustained less damage than anticipated. While Israeli officials claim the joint strikes set Iran’s program back by up to two years, their earlier public statements already projected a two-year delay prior to U.S. involvement—making the real impact of the strikes a matter of political spin, not battlefield reality.
Notably, the U.S. used submarine-launched Tomahawk missiles at Isfahan instead of bunker-busters—an implicit admission that the bombs would not have reached the deeply buried layers of the site.
Reality Check from Experts and Congress
Independent analysts and members of Congress aren’t buying Trump’s post-strike bravado. Weapons expert Jeffrey Lewis, of the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, told CNN that the ceasefire with Iran was reached before either Israel or the U.S. could destroy key nuclear facilities at Natanz, Isfahan, and Parchin.
“These facilities could serve as the basis for the rapid reconstitution of Iran’s nuclear program,” Lewis warned.
Even Republican Rep. Michael McCaul, a key voice on foreign affairs, conceded that the strikes were never designed to wipe out Iran’s nuclear program. “It was always known to be a temporary setback,” he said.
Meanwhile, Rep. Pat Ryan (D-NY) took to social media after the White House abruptly canceled classified briefings for both the House and Senate. “Trump just cancelled a classified House briefing on the Iran strikes with zero explanation,” Ryan posted. “His team knows they can’t back up his bluster and BS.”
What Was the Point?
The unanswered question is why the U.S. would risk a major regional war for a strike that was never going to fully eliminate Iran’s nuclear capability. Trump has built his foreign policy around spectacle—not strategy—and the Iran strike appears to be another entry in that playbook: shock, awe, and zero lasting effect.
It’s a pattern that echoes through his presidency and post-presidency: optics over outcomes, headlines over hard truths, and political gain at the expense of long-term stability.
