The United States dropped its most powerful bombs on Iranian nuclear facilities on June 21, 2025, but questions are emerging about what was actually hit. While President Trump celebrates a major victory, Iranian officials reveal the targeted sites had been emptied of nuclear materials long before the attack.
Massive Bombs Hit Three Sites
American B-2 stealth bombers dropped six GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs on Iran’s Fordow nuclear facility. These bunker-buster weapons weigh 30,000 pounds each and can drill through 200 feet of concrete and rock before exploding. The US also fired 30 Tomahawk missiles at the Natanz and Isfahan nuclear sites.
The GBU-57A/B represents America’s most powerful non-nuclear weapon. Only the US military owns these bombs and the B-2 bombers needed to carry them. The weapons were specifically designed to destroy facilities hidden deep underground, like Iran’s mountain-protected nuclear sites.
Trump Claims Total Success
Trump declared the mission a “spectacular military success” and insisted Iran’s nuclear facilities were “completely and totally obliterated.” He warned Iran to agree to peace immediately or face even more devastating attacks. “If peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill,” Trump announced.
The president presented the strikes as proof that Iran’s nuclear weapons program had been eliminated. He called it a historic moment that would prevent Iran from ever threatening the world with nuclear weapons.
Iran Reveals Sites Were Already Empty
Hassan Abedini, deputy political head of Iran’s state broadcaster, dropped a bombshell revelation. Iran had evacuated all three nuclear sites “some time ago.” The enriched uranium stockpiles had been moved away from the nuclear centers well before the American bombs arrived.
This means the massive explosions may have destroyed empty buildings rather than active nuclear facilities. No radioactive materials were present when the bombs hit, eliminating any risk of radiation leaks but also questioning what was actually accomplished.
CIA Director Had Different Story
The strikes happened amid a messy public disagreement between Trump and his own spy chief. CIA Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard had told Congress in March that Iran wasn’t building nuclear weapons. She testified that Iran’s Supreme Leader hadn’t authorized restarting the nuclear weapons program that stopped in 2003.
Trump dismissed his intelligence director’s assessment completely. “I don’t care what she said,” he told reporters. “I think they were very close to having one.” This rare public contradiction between a president and intelligence chief highlighted deep disagreements about Iran’s actual nuclear capabilities.
Gabbard later tried to smooth things over, claiming intelligence
showed Iran could produce nuclear weapons “within weeks to months” if leaders decided to move forward. But her original testimony suggested Iran wasn’t actively building bombs at all.
Similar Posts
No Radiation Found
The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed no increase in radiation levels around the bombed sites. This finding supports Iranian claims that nuclear materials had been removed beforehand. Iranian radiation detectors also recorded no radioactive releases after the explosions.
The lack of contamination suggests either the sites contained no nuclear materials or Iran successfully protected them during the attack. Either way, it raises questions about the environmental and strategic impact of the massive bombing campaign.
Netanyahu’s Decades of Warnings
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised Trump’s decision as “bold, righteous and historic.” He claimed the strikes would “change history” by stopping Iran from getting dangerous weapons. But Netanyahu has been making similar warnings for over thirty years.
Since the 1990s, Netanyahu has repeatedly claimed Iran was just months or years away from nuclear weapons. He famously used a cartoon bomb drawing at the United Nations in 2012 to warn about Iran’s nuclear timeline. He made similar claims about Iraq’s non-existent nuclear program before the 2003 invasion.
Netanyahu often compares Iran’s leaders to Nazi Germany and warns about potential nuclear threats to Israel’s existence. His latest statements described preventing a “nuclear Holocaust perpetrated by the Iranian regime.” Critics note his warnings have consistently predicted imminent nuclear weapons for decades without them materializing.
Global Concerns About Escalation
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi called the attacks illegal violations of international law and the UN Charter. He warned of “everlasting consequences” and threatened retaliation against American interests in the region. Iran requested an emergency UN Security Council meeting to address what it called America’s “heinous attacks.”
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres described the strikes as “dangerous escalation” that threatened regional peace and security. Major regional powers including Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Oman expressed deep concern about wider conflict spreading across the Middle East.
Was Anything Actually Destroyed?
The central question remains whether the strikes accomplished their goal of eliminating Iran’s nuclear program. If Iran really did evacuate nuclear materials beforehand, the military action destroyed empty buildings rather than active nuclear infrastructure.
Nuclear experts point out that bombing facilities doesn’t eliminate the knowledge needed for uranium enrichment. Iran’s nuclear scientists retain their expertise even if buildings are destroyed. The country has also spread its nuclear program across multiple sites specifically to survive such attacks.
The Fordow facility was considered the most challenging target because it sits deep inside a mountain. While Trump claimed total destruction, Iranian officials suggest only surface structures and tunnel entrances were damaged. The underground sections may remain intact.
The strikes mark a dramatic escalation in Middle East tensions, but their effectiveness remains unclear. Both sides present completely different versions of what happened, leaving the true impact unknown. The success or failure of this massive military operation may not become clear for months as the dust settles and independent assessments emerge.
