US bombs did not destroy Iranian nuclear facilities, intelligence agency finds


Summary

Damage not complete

A classified assessment by the Defense Intelligence Agency reportedly found U.S. airstrikes failed to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities.

Brief setback

The intelligence assessment says attacks by the United States and Israel may have delayed Iran’s ability to build a nuclear bomb by only a few months.

White House response

The Trump administration says the assessment is “flat-out wrong,” but a spokeswoman did not identify inaccuracies.


Full story

Preliminary intelligence assessments of the U.S. airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites suggest the bombing did not destroy the facilities, contradicting claims by President Donald Trump and other administration officials. The assessments reportedly determined that attacks by the United States and Israel may have delayed Iran’s ability to produce a nuclear weapon by only a few months.

The classified assessments were reported Tuesday, June 24, by The New York Times and CNN. The White House rejected the assessment’s conclusions.

QR code for SAN app download

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

 Facilities not destroyed

Trump has said that American-made bunker-buster bombs “completely and totally obliterated” the three Iranian facilities targeted on Saturday, June 21. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth repeated that assertion during a news conference Sunday, June 22.

But the Times and CNN said the report by the Defense Intelligence Agency came to a very different conclusion. Both news outlets cited officials familiar with the agency’s assessment.

The bombing sealed off entrances to two Iranian sites, the Times reported, but did not destroy or collapse underground buildings where scientists were believed to be enriching uranium. The strikes reportedly damaged the electrical system at the Fordo nuclear site, which was constructed deep inside a mountain. It is not clear how long it would take Iran to repair damage and restart Fordo and other facilities if it chooses to do so. Regardless, the bombs apparently did not penetrate underground structures at Fordo, Natanz or Isfahan.

The Defense Intelligence Agency also found that Iran retained control of almost all of its nuclear material. The agency found that much of Iran’s enriched uranium had been moved to other locations before the U.S. airstrikes. CNN quoted an official who said uranium centrifuges were mostly “intact.”

Short-term setback

The intelligence agency said the U.S. bombs and airstrikes by Israel may have delayed Iran’s nuclear program by no more than six months. Before last weekend’s attack, the Times reported, U.S. intelligence officials believed Iran had the capacity of rushing a bomb to completion within three months.

Both the Times and CNN quoted officials who stressed that the assessment is preliminary.

But Rep. Michael McCaul, a Republican from Texas who sits on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, told CNN: “I’ve been briefed on this plan in the past, and it was never meant to completely destroy the nuclear facilities, but rather to cause significant damage. But it was always known to be a temporary setback.”

CNN also quoted Jeffrey Lewis, a professor at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies, who said the U.S. attack failed to cripple Iran’s nuclear program. Lewis has studied commercial satellite images of the sites hit by U.S. bombs.

He said the ceasefire between Iran and Israel announced by Trump “came without either Israel or the United States being able to destroy several key underground nuclear facilities.”

Those facilities, he said, “could serve as the basis for the rapid reconstitution of Iran’s nuclear program.”

 White House response

In a statement to the Times, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt called the Defense Intelligence Agency’s assessment “flat-out wrong,” but she pointed to no specific inaccuracies.

“The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program,” Leavitt’s statement said. “Everyone knows what happens when you drop 14 30,000-pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration.”

Devin Pavlou (Digital Producer) contributed to this report.
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Why this story matters

Public understanding of the effectiveness of U.S. and Israeli airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites is crucial to policy, international relations and global security, especially as intelligence assessments contradict initial official claims about the extent of the damage.

Intelligence assessment vs. official claims

Discrepancies between initial intelligence findings and official government statements raise questions about transparency and accuracy in communicating the outcomes of military actions.

Nuclear proliferation risk

The limited impact of the strikes, as reported by intelligence agencies, highlights ongoing concerns about the potential for Iran to quickly restore its nuclear program and the broader risks of nuclear weapons development.

Political and diplomatic consequences

Contradictory reports and official denials affect international trust, future negotiations, and the perception of military and diplomatic strategies by the U.S., Israel, and Iran.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 83 media outlets

Community reaction

Democratic lawmakers expressed frustration over the cancellation of classified briefings on the Iran strikes, saying transparency and accountability have been hindered. Some officials voiced concern about the administration’s communication and claims versus the intelligence assessments, leading to public debates and skepticism within both political and civilian communities regarding the effectiveness of the strikes and government transparency.

Context corner

Iran's nuclear program has been the focus of international sanctions, diplomatic negotiations, and covert operations for years. The targeted facilities targeted are reportedly deeply buried to resist attacks. Historically, military action against nuclear sites rarely results in long-term incapacitation, as nations often rebuild or disperse assets. The context includes long-standing U.S.-Iran and Israel-Iran nuclear tensions.

Global impact

The strikes and subsequent intelligence reports have affected U.S. relations with allies and adversaries, reinforcing concerns among global actors about nuclear proliferation. The situation highlights the delicate balance between military action and diplomatic engagement in addressing nuclear issues, with international monitoring agencies urging transparency and access to Iranian nuclear sites.

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left emphasize the limited efficacy of the strikes, framing them as a political overreach by Trump, using emotionally charged terms like “didn’t destroy” and highlighting constitutional concerns with words such as “authoritarianism” and calls for impeachment.
  • Media outlets in the center adopt a more measured tone, detailing complex geopolitical dynamics without overt partisan language.
  • Media outlets on the right downplay the incomplete destruction by spotlighting the strategic impact of “bunker buster” bombs and military “success,” often invoking expert endorsements and patriotic rhetoric, while casting doubt on intelligence that contradicts Trump’s claims.

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

392 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • A U.S. intelligence report indicates that airstrikes on Iran's nuclear sites only delayed the program by a few months, contrary to President Donald Trump's claims of total destruction.
  • The Defense Intelligence Agency assessed damage from attacks on Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan sites, stating that core components of Iran's nuclear program remain intact.
  • Israeli officials reported that Iran had moved enriched uranium before U.S. strikes, signaling ongoing concerns about the nation's nuclear ambitions.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

  • A classified U.S. report showed the U.S. attack on Iran's nuclear sites only set back the country's nuclear program a few months, according to The New York Times.
  • The Israeli military said it struck routes leading to Iran's underground Fordo nuclear facility to obstruct access to the site.
  • Trump claimed Iran's nuclear sites sustained monumental damage from the U.S. strikes, citing satellite images.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Right

  • A preliminary U.S. intelligence report suggests that the bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities only set back its nuclear program by a few months, contrary to President Donald Trump's claims.
  • The New York Times reported that two facilities were sealed off but not collapsed, causing less than six months of delay to Iran's nuclear progress.
  • Rafael Grossi, head of the IAEA, called for immediate access to the sites to assess the likely significant damage from the attacks.

Report an issue with this summary

Other (sources without bias rating):

Powered by Ground News™

Timeline

Timeline