U.S. and Israel Launch Joint Strikes on Iran. On the night of June 21–22, 2025, the United States and Israel carried out a coordinated military operation against Iran’s top nuclear facilities—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. President Donald Trump announced the unprecedented action in a televised address, framing the strikes as critical to halting Iran’s nuclear progress and reinforcing regional security. This historic move marked the first direct U.S. military strikes on Iranian territory in decades.
1. 🚀 Strategic Context & Operational Planning
- Background of Conflict
Since mid-June, Israel had initiated Operation Rising Lion, focused on degrading Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and missile capacity. Yet, despite weeks of air raids using advanced warfare technology, Israel’s aircraft faced substantial limitations when targeting facilities buried deep underground—most notably at Fordow and Isfahan. - Decision for U.S. Involvement
Facing heavily fortified sites deep within mountainous terrain, Israeli officials reportedly requested U.S. assistance. The U.S. response involved deploying B-2 stealth bombers loaded with GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bombs—capable of breaching hardened underground complexes.
Additionally, U.S. submarines launched 30 Tomahawk cruise missiles targeting Natanz and Isfahan. - Operational Scale & Execution
- Fordow: Six 30,000‑lb MOPs were dropped, with President Trump asserting “Fordow is gone.” This was declared a “spectacular military success”.
- Natanz & Isfahan: Natanz was hit by additional MOPs along with Tomahawks. Thirteen Tomahawk missiles launched from subs struck both sites.
According to Reuters, all U.S. aircraft safely exited Iranian airspace, with Trump emphasizing “peace or tragedy” depending on Iran’s next steps.
2. Deep Dives: The Three Targets
- Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant
Situated about 100 meters underground near Qom, Fordow has been a symbol of Iran’s ability to shield its nuclear capabilities . U.S. deployment of MOP bombs signaled their resolve to penetrate hardened facilities and cripple Iran’s centrifuge-rich environment. - Natanz Nuclear Facility
The site experienced serious damage earlier in June from Israeli airstrikes, which had damaged centrifuges and electrics. U.S. strikes intensified the blow—destroying centrifuges, halting enrichment processes, and disabling infrastructure under a mountain complex. - Isfahan Nuclear Technology and Research Center
Also subterranean, Isfahan houses uranium conversion facilities and is structurally complex. U.S. involvement was essential: American officials reportedly described it as “the hardest target” of the trio), reinforcing the perception that Israel alone could not have achieved mission success.
3. Political Messaging: From Strength to Diplomacy(U.S. and Israel)
In his prime-time address, Trump labeled the operation a “historic moment,” stressing Iran now faces a choice between peace or “tragedy” . He claimed the strikes aimed not at regime change but deterrence—calling for diplomacy and pledging future action if Iran resumed hostile activities.
Prime Minister Netanyahu praised the action, calling it a pivotal moment underscoring U.S.–Israel synergy in preventing a nuclear Iran. Trump echoed this partnership and warned Iran, “ANY RETALIATION … WILL BE MET WITH FORCE FAR GREATER”.
4. Regional Fallout & Retaliation Risks
- Iranian Reaction
Iran’s Foreign Minister decried the strikes as “outrageous” and threatened enduring consequences. Tehran’s UN ambassador summoned an emergency Security Council meeting, accusing the U.S. of illegal aggression . - Immediate Military Response
Iran unleashed missile salvos toward Israel and U.S. assets in the region. The tensions triggered air-raid sirens in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, with at least 11 casualties reported during missile exchanges. - Militant Ally Reactions
Yemen’s Houthi rebels pledged to retaliate soon. Regional instability rose sharply, and Gulf nations hosting U.S. bases increased military readiness. - Diplomatic Alarms
UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned of a dangerous escalation. NATO likewise expressed concern and vowed close monitoring.
5. Domestic Pushback in the U.S.(U.S. and Israel)
The strikes sparked fierce debate within U.S. political circles:
- Congressional Response
Senator Mark Warner (D‑VA) criticized Trump for bypassing constitutional checks and launching a military action without Congress’s approval.
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez condemned the move as “disastrous” and called it an impeachable offense.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries echoed similar sentiments, arguing Trump had failed to inform Congress and risked dragging the U.S. into an unnecessary war. - Support from Republican Lawmakers
Many GOP figures, including Sen. Lindsey Graham, applauded the strikes as decisive and necessary to dismantle Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
6. Global Reactions on U.S. and Israel Launch Joint Strikes on Iran
- U.S. Allies Split
While leaders of Israel and several eastern European countries backed the strike, some European governments expressed concern over unilateral military actions and urged a return to diplomatic engagement. - International Nuclear Safety
Despite fears, the International Atomic Energy Agency reported no abnormal radiation levels following the strikes, easing immediate nuclear safety concerns. - Other Global Influences
Rival powers like Russia, China, and North Korea reportedly took note of the U.S.’s willingness to use “unmatched force” on nuclear targets—a reminder to authoritarian regimes about American military resolve.
7. Experts Weigh In: Deterrence or a Dirty Gamble?
Security analysts suggest the U.S. aimed to reassert itself as a nuclear force willing to penetrate hardened targets . While the strikes demonstrate capability, experts caution they also carry the risk of:
- Escalatory Spiral: Iran could retaliate via proxy militias, cyber attacks, or missile strikes.
- Regional Disruption: Forces in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, or Gulf areas may escalate hostilities.
- Domestic Disengagement: Without clear policy pathways, the U.S. may confront prolonged involvement.
- Diplomatic Breakdown: By sidelining negotiations, the strikes might foreclose peaceful resolutions .
8. What’s Next? Scenarios to Watch(U.S. and Israel)
- Iranian Retaliation
Watch for missile launches at military bases or shipping lanes, cyber intrusions, or direct military engagements. - Diplomacy or War
Will Iran return to negotiations under new power dynamics, or double down with regional support for asymmetrical conflict? - U.S. Congressional Role
Expect urgent legislative sessions to define presidential war authority and possible sanctions shifts. - Nuclear Program Disruption
The ability of Iran to rebuild centrifuges underground will determine if the strikes have lasting impact. - Global Nuclear Norms
This may reinforce the reach and capability of counterpart nuclear programs among U.S. adversaries.
9. Historical Perspective & Future Outlook(U.S. and Israel)
While Israel previously conducted limited strikes, including those in April and October 2024, the U.S. action represents a seminal shift. By deploying MOP bombs and B-2 stealth bombers, Washington displayed an unparalleled capacity for subterranean targeting.
This moment could reshape Middle Eastern dynamics, potentially deterring nuclear ambitions—but also may catalyze Iran’s pivot towards covert response measures.
Conclusion
The June 21–22 strikes marked a watershed in U.S.–Israel–Iran relations. From a military standpoint, the operation showcased extreme precision tailored to fortified targets. Politically, it spotlighted U.S.–Israel unity and projected global deterrence. Yet, the move exposed rifts domestically and prompted international alarm.
Now, as the world awaits Iran’s next move, global watchers debate whether diplomacy, escalation, or long-term stalemate will follow. With regional tensions at a critical point, the decisions made in the coming weeks may determine whether this episode becomes a fleeting flashpoint or the spark to greater conflict.