Report: Trump Considering Airstrikes on Iran’s Nuclear Facilities

Photo Credit: Tech. Sgt. Fernando Serna

F-15C Eagle aircraft armed with AIM-7 Sparrow and AIM-9 Sidewinder.

President-elect Donald J. Trump is considering a range of measures to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, including the possibility of conducting preemptive airstrikes, according to a report published Friday by The Wall Street Journal.

Recent disclosures about Iran’s expanding nuclear activities have intensified sensitive internal discussions, though officials emphasized that deliberations remain in the early stages.

Iran has amassed enough highly enriched uranium to build four nuclear bombs, according to recent reports, positioning it as the only non-nuclear-weapon state producing fissile material at near-weapons-grade levels of 60% purity. Experts warn that converting this stockpile into weapons-grade nuclear fuel could be accomplished within days, heightening international concerns about Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

The WSJ cited two people familiar with conversations between Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu where the president-elect expressed concerns about the possibility of Iran advancing toward a nuclear weapon under his watch. Trump signaled that he is seeking strategies to avert such a scenario while avoiding actions that could trigger a new military conflict involving the United States.

Strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities could escalate tensions, risking direct confrontation between Washington and Tehran. However, members of Trump’s transition team are reportedly giving more serious consideration to the possibility of military strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities, influenced by evolving dynamics in the Middle East.

DO IT BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE

Breitbart News senior editor Joel B. Pollak wrote on Thursday that “Israel should attack Iran’s nuclear program while it can – and before the desperate Iranian regime detonates a bomb.”

Pollak argued that Iran, widely regarded as the world’s most aggressive state sponsor of terrorism, has pursued nuclear weapons capabilities for decades and is believed to be on the brink of achieving that goal. In response, Israel and, at times, the United States, have undertaken both overt and covert measures aimed at disrupting Tehran’s nuclear program. Leaders in both countries have also warned that military action remains on the table as a last resort to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear-armed state.

Until recently, several strategic deterrents shielded Iran from potential military strikes on its nuclear facilities. Chief among them was Hezbollah. Armed with hundreds of thousands of rockets aimed at Israeli cities, Hezbollah also built a fortified network of tunnels, arsenals, and hideouts near the Israeli border, positioning itself for a large-scale assault if Israel attacked Iran. All that is gone now and Israel need no longer fear a massive Hezbollah retaliation.

Another significant deterrent was Syria. However, following the collapse of the Assad regime, Israel systematically dismantled Syria’s military infrastructure, including its infamous chemical weapons stockpiles and advanced Russian-made air defense systems. In a similar strike last October, Israel also damaged Iran’s air defenses, clearing a path for potential air missions targeting Tehran’s nuclear sites.

With these obstacles largely removed, both Israeli and American air forces now face fewer operational challenges should they decide to conduct bombing missions against Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Trump’s advisers who advocate for military options in his second term have discussed supporting Israeli strikes on key Iranian nuclear sites, including Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan. They have even raised the possibility of US involvement in a joint operation.

However, many current and former Israeli officials acknowledge significant uncertainties surrounding the effectiveness of a unilateral Israeli strike. Iran’s nuclear facilities are heavily fortified, with some buried deep underground, posing formidable challenges to even the most advanced military operations. This has fueled discussions about the potential necessity of US military support to ensure the success of any large-scale campaign against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.