Trump says US forces bombed Iran nuclear sites

US President Donald Trump ended his posting on Truth Social saying, 'Now is the time for peace.' PHOTO: BLOOMBERG
ISTANBUL/JERUSALEM - US President Donald Trump on June 21 said that a 'very successful attack' on three nuclear sites in Iran had been successfully carried out, including at Fordow.
In a posting on Truth Social, Mr Trump added: 'All planes are safely on their way home' and he congratulated 'our great American Warriors.'
Mr Trump ended his posting saying, 'Now is the time for peace.'
The action came as Israel and Iran have been engaged in more than a week of aerial combat that has resulted in deaths and injuries in both countries.
Israel launched the attacks on Iran saying that it wanted to remove any chance of Tehran developing nuclear weapons.
Iran has argued that its nuclear program is intended for peaceful purposes.
Diplomatic efforts by Western nations to stop the hostilities had so far been unsuccessful. REUTERS
Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

CNA

25 minutes ago

• CNA

Strikes on Iran mark Trump's biggest, and riskiest, foreign policy gamble: Analysts

WASHINGTON: With his unprecedented decision to bomb Iran's nuclear sites, directly joining Israel's air attack on its regional arch-foe, US President Donald Trump has done something he had long vowed to avoid - intervene militarily in a major foreign war. The dramatic US strike, including the targeting of Iran's most heavily fortified nuclear installation deep underground, marks the biggest foreign policy gamble of Trump's two presidencies and one fraught with risks and unknowns. Trump, who insisted on Saturday (Jun 21) that Iran must now make peace or face further attacks, could provoke Tehran into retaliating by closing the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important oil artery, attacking US military bases and allies in the Middle East, stepping up its missile barrage on Israel and activating proxy groups against American and Israeli interests worldwide, analysts said. Such moves could escalate into a broader, more protracted conflict than Trump had envisioned, evoking echoes of the 'forever wars' that America fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, which he had derided as 'stupid' and promised never to be dragged into. 'The Iranians are seriously weakened and degraded in their military capabilities,' said Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for Democratic and Republican administrations. 'But they have all sorts of asymmetric ways that they can respond ... This is not going to end quick.' In the lead-up to the bombing that he announced late on Saturday, Trump had vacillated between threats of military action and appeals for renewed negotiation to persuade Iran to reach a deal to dismantle its nuclear programme. A senior White House official said that once Trump was convinced that Tehran had no interest in reaching a nuclear agreement, he decided the strikes were 'the right thing to do'. Trump gave the go-ahead once he was assured of a 'high probability of success,' the official said – a determination reached after more than a week of Israeli air attacks on Iran's nuclear and military facilities paved the way for the US to deliver the potentially crowning blow. NUCLEAR THREAT REMAINS Trump touted the "great success" of the strikes, which he said included the use of massive "bunker-buster bombs" on the main site at Fordow. But some experts suggested that while Iran's nuclear programme may have been set back for many years, the threat may be far from over. Iran denies seeking a nuclear weapon, saying its programme is for purely peaceful purposes. 'In the long term, military action is likely to push Iran to determine nuclear weapons are necessary for deterrence and that Washington is not interested in diplomacy,' the Arms Control Association, a non-partisan US-based organisation that advocates for arms control legislation, said in a statement. 'Military strikes alone cannot destroy Iran's extensive nuclear knowledge. The strikes will set Iran's programme back, but at the cost of strengthening Tehran's resolve to reconstitute its sensitive nuclear activities,' the group said. Eric Lob, assistant professor in the Department of Politics and International Relations at Florida International University, said Iran's next move remains an open question and suggested that among its forms of retaliation could be to hit 'soft targets' of the US and Israel inside and outside the region. But he also said there was a possibility that Iran could return to the negotiating table – 'though they would be doing so in an even weaker position' – or seek a diplomatic off-ramp. In the immediate aftermath of the US strikes, however, Iran showed little appetite for concessions. Iran's Atomic Energy Organization said it would not allow development of its 'national industry' to be stopped, and an Iranian state television commentator said every US citizen or military member in the region would not be legitimate targets. Karim Sadjadpour, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, posted on X: 'Trump indicated this is now the time for peace. It's unclear and unlikely the Iranians will see it the same way. This is more likely to open a new chapter of the 46-year-old US-Iran war than conclude it.' "REGIME CHANGE" Some analysts suggested that Trump, whose administration has previously disavowed any aim of dislodging the Iranian leadership, could be drawn into seeking 'regime change' if Tehran carries out major reprisals or moves to build a nuclear weapon. That, in turn, would bring additional risks. 'Beware mission creep, aiming for regime change and democratization campaigns,' said Laura Blumenfeld, a Middle East analyst at the Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies in Washington. 'You'll find the bones of many failed US moral missions buried in Middle East sands.' Jonathan Panikoff, a former US deputy intelligence officer for the Middle East, said Iran's leadership would quickly engage in 'disproportionate attacks' if it felt its survival was imperilled. But Tehran will also have to be mindful of the consequences, he said. While actions such as closing the Strait of Hormuz would pose problems for Trump with the resulting higher oil prices and potential US inflationary impact, it would also hurt China, one of Iran's few powerful allies. At the same time, Trump is already facing strong pushback from congressional Democrats against the Iran attack and will also have to contend with opposition from the anti-interventionist wing of his Republican MAGA base. Trump, who faced no major international crisis in his first term, is now embroiled in one just six months into his second. Even if he hopes US military involvement can be limited in time and scope, the history of such conflicts often carries unintended consequences for American presidents. Trump's slogan of 'peace through strength' will certainly be tested as never before, especially with his opening of a new military front after failing to meet his campaign promises to quickly end wars in Ukraine and Gaza. 'Trump is back in the war business,' said Richard Gowan, US director at the International Crisis Group. 'I am not sure anyone in Moscow, Tehran or Beijing ever believed his spiel that he is a peacemaker. It always looked more like a campaign phrase than a strategy."

Straits Times

30 minutes ago

• Straits Times

Tesla expected to launch long-discussed robotaxi service

The long-awaited launch follows the dramatic meltdown earlier this month in relations between Mr Musk and Mr Trump, which saw a cascade of bitter attacks from both men. PHOTO: REUTERS NEW YORK - Tesla is expected to begin offering robotaxi service on June 22 in Austin, an initial step that Mr Elon Musk's backers believe could lead to the company's next growth wave. The launch – which comes as Mr Musk refocuses on his business ventures following a controversial stint in Mr Donald Trump's administration – will employ the Model Y sport utility vehicle rather than Tesla's much-touted Cybercab, which is still under development. The long-awaited launch follows the dramatic meltdown earlier this month in relations between Mr Musk and Mr Trump, which saw a cascade of bitter attacks from both men. Since then, Mr Musk has publicly expressed regret for some of his statements, while his company's Texas operation has readied the Austin push – part of a major drive on autonomous technology and artificial intelligence that Tesla bulls believe will yield huge profits. This group includes Wedbush analyst Daniel Ives, who said autonomous technology could be a catalyst for potentially US$1 trillion (S$1.29 trillion) in additional market value or more. 'There are countless skeptics of the Tesla robotaxi vision with many bears thinking this day would never come,' said Mr Ives, who predicted that Trump's administration would clear roadblocks for Tesla and pivot from the recent 'soap opera'. 'The golden era of autonomous for Tesla officially kicks off on Sunday in Austin,' Mr Ives said in a note on June 20 . Business-friendly Texas But the unveiling in the Texas state capital comes amid questions about how Tesla will try to overcome criticism of Mr Musk's activities for Mr Trump. Tesla saw profits plunge 71 per cent in the first quarter following poor sales in several markets. In picking Austin for the debut of the autonomous vehicle (AV) service, Mr Musk is opting for a US state known for its company-friendly approach to regulation. 'Texas law allows for AV testing and operations on Texas roadways as long as they meet the same safety and insurance requirements as every other vehicle on the road,' the Texas Department of Transportation told AFP. An Austin website listed six autonomous vehicle companies at various stages of operation: ADMT (Volkswagen), AVRide, Tesla, Zoox (Amazon), Motional (Hyundai) and Waymo (Alphabet/Google). But the Texas legislature this year enacted a new bill that requires prior authorisation from the state's Department of Motor Vehicles before companies can operate on a public street without human drivers, a group of seven Democratic lawmakers said in a June 18 letter to Tesla. Citing the enhanced system, the lawmakers asked Tesla to delay testing until after the law takes effect September 1. If Tesla proceeds with the launch this weekend, 'we request that you respond to this letter with detailed information demonstrating that Tesla will be compliant with the new law,' the letter said. Starting slow Mr Musk had initially planned the launch for June 12, before pushing back, saying he was being 'super paranoid' about safety. 'We want to deliberately take it slow,' Mr Musk said in a May 20 interview on CNBC, telling the network that Tesla would probably only operate 10 autonomous vehicles the first week. But that number will rise to perhaps 1,000 'within a few months', Mr Musk told CNBC. 'And then we will expand to other cities.... San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Antonio.' The service will be offered from 6am until midnight and will be available to 'early access' users on an invitation-only basis in a geo-fenced area, Tesla owner Sawyer Merritt said on June 20 on Mr Musk's X platform, adding that Tesla had given him permission to release the information. Mr Musk last fall unveiled the Cybercab, which has no steering wheel or pedals. But production is not expected to begin on the vehicle until 2026. Tesla's robotaxi launch comes well after Waymo's offering of commercial robotaxi service, with more US cities gradually added. The US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in October 2024 opened a probe into Tesla's Full Self-Driving software after receiving four reports of crashes. The NHTSA on May 8 asked Tesla for additional information on its technology in light of the Austin launch. But the NHTSA does not 'pre-approve' new technologies, the agency told AFP. 'Rather, manufacturers certify that each vehicle meets NHTSA's rigorous safety standards, and the agency investigates incidents involving potential safety defects,' the NHTSA said. AFP Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

Straits Times

an hour ago

• Straits Times

Strikes on Iran mark Trump's biggest, and riskiest, foreign policy gamble

U.S. President Donald Trump walks after delivering an address to the nation at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S. June 21, 2025, following U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/Pool WASHINGTON - With his unprecedented decision to bomb Iran's nuclear sites, directly joining Israel's air attack on its regional arch-foe, U.S. President Donald Trump has done something he had long vowed to avoid - intervene militarily in a major foreign war. The dramatic U.S. strike, including the targeting of Iran's most heavily fortified nuclear installation deep underground, marks the biggest foreign policy gamble of Trump's two presidencies and one fraught with risks and unknowns. Trump, who insisted on Saturday that Iran must now make peace or face further attacks, could provoke Tehran into retaliating by closing the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important oil artery, attacking U.S. military bases and allies in the Middle East, stepping up its missile barrage on Israel and activating proxy groups against American and Israeli interests worldwide, analysts said. Such moves could escalate into a broader, more protracted conflict than Trump had envisioned, evoking echoes of the 'forever wars' that America fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, which he had derided as 'stupid' and promised never to be dragged into. 'The Iranians are seriously weakened and degraded in their military capabilities,' said Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for Democratic and Republican administrations. 'But they have all sorts of asymmetric ways that they can respond... This is not going to end quick.' In the lead-up to the bombing that he announced late on Saturday, Trump had vacillated between threats of military action and appeals for renewed negotiation to persuade Iran to reach a deal to dismantle its nuclear program. A senior White House official said that once Trump was convinced that Tehran had no interest in reaching a nuclear agreement, he decided the strikes were 'the right thing to do.' Trump gave the go-ahead once he was assured of a 'high probability of success,' the official said – a determination reached after more than a week of Israeli air attacks on Iran's nuclear and military facilities paved the way for the U.S. to deliver the potentially crowning blow. NUCLEAR THREAT REMAINS Trump touted the "great success" of the strikes, which he said included the use of massive "bunker-buster bombs" on the main site at Fordow. But some experts suggested that while Iran's nuclear program may have been set back for many years, the threat may be far from over. Iran denies seeking a nuclear weapon, saying its program is for purely peaceful purposes. 'In the long term, military action is likely to push Iran to determine nuclear weapons are necessary for deterrence and that Washington is not interested in diplomacy,' the Arms Control Association, a non-partisan U.S.-based organization that advocates for arms control legislation, said in a statement. 'Military strikes alone cannot destroy Iran's extensive nuclear knowledge. The strikes will set Iran's program back, but at the cost of strengthening Tehran's resolve to reconstitute its sensitive nuclear activities,' the group said. Eric Lob, assistant professor in the Department of Politics and International Relations at Florida International University, said Iran's next move remains an open question and suggested that among its forms of retaliation could be to hit 'soft targets' of the U.S. and Israel inside and outside the region. But he also said there was a possibility that Iran could return to the negotiating table – 'though they would be doing so in an even weaker position' – or seek a diplomatic off-ramp. In the immediate aftermath of the U.S. strikes, however, Iran showed little appetite for concessions. Iran's Atomic Energy Organization said it would not allow development of its 'national industry' to be stopped, and an Iranian state television commentator said every U.S. citizen or military member in the region would not be legitimate targets. Karim Sadjadpour, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, posted on X: 'Trump indicated this is now the time for peace. It's unclear and unlikely the Iranians will see it the same way. This is more likely to open a new chapter of the 46-year-old US-Iran war than conclude it.' 'REGIME CHANGE' Some analysts suggested that Trump, whose administration has previously disavowed any aim of dislodging the Iranian leadership, could be drawn into seeking 'regime change' if Tehran carries out major reprisals or moves to build a nuclear weapon. That, in turn, would bring additional risks. 'Beware mission creep, aiming for regime change and democratization campaigns,' said Laura Blumenfeld, a Middle East analyst at the Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies in Washington. 'You'll find the bones of many failed U.S. moral missions buried in Middle East sands.' Jonathan Panikoff, a former U.S. deputy intelligence officer for the Middle East, said Iran's leadership would quickly engage in 'disproportionate attacks' if it felt its survival was imperiled. But Tehran will also have to be mindful of the consequences, he said. While actions such as closing the Strait of Hormuz would pose problems for Trump with the resulting higher oil prices and potential U.S. inflationary impact, it would also hurt China, one of Iran's few powerful allies. At the same time, Trump is already facing strong push-back from congressional Democrats against the Iran attack and will also have to contend with opposition from the anti-interventionist wing of his Republican MAGA base. Trump, who faced no major international crisis in his first term, is now embroiled in one just six months into his second. Even if he hopes U.S. military involvement can be limited in time and scope, the history of such conflicts often carries unintended consequences for American presidents. Trump's slogan of 'peace through strength' will certainly be tested as never before, especially with his opening of a new military front after failing to meet his campaign promises to quickly end wars in Ukraine and Gaza. 'Trump is back in the war business,' said Richard Gowan, U.N. director at the International Crisis Group. 'I am not sure anyone in Moscow, Tehran or Beijing ever believed his spiel that he is a peacemaker. It always looked more like a campaign phrase than a strategy." REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.