President Donald Trump announced on June 21, 2025, that U.S. forces launched significant air strikes on three major Iranian nuclear sites: Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan. The operation employed B‑2 stealth bombers carrying 30,000‑lb bunker‑buster bombs, along with Tomahawk cruise missiles. Trump described the mission as a “spectacular military success” and warned that further strikes would follow if Iran did not pursue peace. He emphasized that all U.S. aircraft safely exited Iranian airspace, and declared that the operation was aimed at halting Iran’s nuclear enrichment capabilities and preventing the country from becoming a nuclear arms state.
The strikes targeted deeply fortified and underground enrichment facilities, particularly Fordow, which had been considered nearly immune to aerial attack. Using heavyweight ordnance designed to penetrate bunkers, the U.S. managed to breach that site—a significant escalation in military capabilities and strategic messaging. Natanz and Esfahan, long-known pillars of Iran’s uranium enrichment infrastructure, were also heavily damaged, reportedly disrupting both advanced centrifuge operations and supporting systems vital to the country’s nuclear ambitions.
Domestically, the action triggered a sharp political response. Republican leaders praised the strikes, hailing them as decisive steps in curbing Iran’s nuclear ambition. Senator John Fetterman and House Speaker Mike Johnson commended the move as necessary and consistent with national security priorities. However, some lawmakers questioned the constitutionality of the strikes and accused the White House of bypassing Congress in authorizing military action without formal oversight.
International reaction was mixed. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu applauded the move as historic and transformative, reinforcing Israel’s earlier operations against Iran. Yet world leaders including those in Europe and the United Nations urged restraint and called for immediate diplomatic engagement. Iran condemned the strikes as illegal aggression, pledging that harsh “everlasting consequences” would follow and announcing it reserved the right to retaliate. The U.N. Security Council was convened amid soaring tensions and regional alarm.
Despite Iran’s pledge to continue its nuclear program, early readings from the International Atomic Energy Agency showed no significant radiation leaks near the targeted sites. This suggests the operation, while severe, avoided triggering nuclear contamination. Israeli and U.S. officials framed the action as a surgical blow to Iran’s capacity rather than an all‑out assault on nuclear infrastructure.
The strikes have heightened fears of a wider Middle East escalation. Retaliatory missile attacks by Iran were already underway, affecting multiple Israeli cities. Regional powers like Turkey offered mediation, and some Gulf nations voiced concern about oil supply disruption and global instability. Market indicators showed a spike in oil prices and a flight toward safe‑haven assets, signaling investor anxiety over renewed conflict.
In Washington, Trump immediately convened a National Security Council meeting on returning to outline further steps. He reiterated that Iran must now choose between peace and a continued campaign of strikes. U.S. defense analysts noted the unprecedented use of bunker‑buster bombs and stealth bombers to penetrate fortified underground sites, marking a tactical milestone. However, they also pointed out that long-term success depends on follow‑through, containment of regional backlash, and robust deterrence strategy.
In summary, the U.S. air strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities represent a dramatic shift in America’s direct involvement in Middle Eastern conflicts. By striking three key sites in a coordinated operation, the administration showcased military precision and resolve, but also sparked deep political, legal, and diplomatic debates. The world now watches to see whether this will deter Iran’s nuclear drive or unleash a broader confrontation.