Trump Responds to Intelligence Leak on Iran Strikes Impact

A leaked intelligence report indicating limited damage from U.S. military actions against Iran's nuclear capabilities has provoked strong pushback from former President Donald Trump and his administration.

In a recent turn of events, Donald Trump and key members of his administration have categorically denied assertions from a leaked intelligence report that claimed U.S. airstrikes against Iran merely delayed its nuclear program by a few months. Speaking at a NATO summit in The Hague, Trump asserted that the strikes resulted in the "virtual obliteration" of Iran's nuclear ambitions, stating they significantly set back the program by "decades."

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reinforced Trump's comments, emphasizing that the preliminary Pentagon assessment was the result of a "low confidence" analysis and confirming that an investigation into the leak by the FBI was underway.

According to sources who consulted the initial assessments reported by CBS, the strikes on critical facilities at Fordo and Natanz failed to eradicate Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile and merely sealed off access points to underground structures, leaving much of the essential infrastructure intact. In response to these claims, the White House quickly labeled the assessment as "flat-out wrong."

While Trump initially acknowledged some uncertainty about the intelligence, he rapidly intensified his rhetoric, describing the offensive as "very severe" and akin to the use of atomic weapons in World War II. When questioned about future strikes should Iran return to nuclear activities, Trump expressed confidence that the threat was effectively neutralized.

Echoing Trump’s sentiments, Secretary of State Marco Rubio disparaged the credibility of the leaked report, accusing its sources of being "professional stabbers" intent on undermining the U.S. narrative. Hegseth characterized the leak as politically motivated, affirming that the munitions used struck designated targets with precision.

The assessment, classified as "low confidence" by U.S. intelligence standards—indicating uncertainty and fragmented sources—suggested Iran's centrifuges largely remained unharmed despite above-ground facilities suffering damage. Reports indicated that some of Iran's enriched uranium had been relocated prior to the strikes, casting further doubt on the extent of the damage inflicted.

The comprehensive military action involved strikes on three nuclear sites—Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan—utilizing advanced bunker-buster bombs capable of penetrating hardened targets. While U.S. officials are optimistic about the operation, conflicting analyses highlight uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of the strikes in halting Iran's nuclear ambitions.

As tensions simmer in the Middle East, both U.S. and Israeli officials are labeling the mission a strategic success, even as Iran's leadership claims minimal impact from the assaults, asserting their nuclear materials had been previously evacuated from the targeted sites.