With 40,000 troops in the region, U.S. braces for response as Iran weighs its options
Fallout from President Trump's historic gamble to strike Iran's nuclear facilities reverberated across the Middle East Sunday, as Washington braced for an unpredictable response from a cornered but determined Islamic Republic.
Although the Iranian government downplayed the impact of the U.S. attack, noting the depths of its nuclear know-how built over decades of study, U.S. military officials said the precision strikes against Iran's three main nuclear facilities caused "extremely severe damage and destruction."
A senior Israeli official told The Times that Jerusalem was so satisfied with the operation that it was prepared to suspend hostilities if Iran ends its missile salvos against Israeli territory.
"We are ready to be done," said the Israeli official, who requested anonymity to speak candidly.
As the dust settled, the sun rose and satellite imagery emerged of the wreckage, the main question among Trump administration officials became how Tehran would respond — both militarily, against U.S. interests in the Persian Gulf and around the world, as well as with the remnants of its nuclear program, with so much of it destroyed.
Tehran's nuclear-armed allies, in Russia and North Korea, have been critical of the military campaign, with former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev raising the prospect of Moscow giving Iran a nuclear warhead in response to the attacks.
The Israeli official dismissed that idea, alluding to direct talks with Moscow over the Iranian program. "We are not concerned," the official said.
Trump's military action, dubbed "Operation Midnight Hammer," was a contingency years in the making, prepared and and assiduously avoided by his predecessors over two decades as a desperate last resort to a nuclear Iran.
Ever since Tehran resumed its fissile enrichment program in 2005, Republican and Democratic presidents alike have warned that the Islamic Republic could never be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. But a constellation of diplomatic talks and complex agreements has failed to dissuade Tehran from a fundamental principle of a "right to enrich" uranium — near to weapons grade — on its own soil.
Despite the dramatic nature of the air raid, few in Washington expressed an appetite for a prolonged U.S. war with Iran and echoed Israel's interest in a truce after deeming its initial operations a success. Vice President JD Vance denied that the United States was "at war" with Iran on Sunday, telling CBS that the nation is, instead, "at war with Iran's nuclear program."
Read more: How Iran could retaliate after the U.S. strikes on its nuclear program
But the prospect of another full-scale U.S. war in the Middle East, made palpable by the weekend strikes, shook Capitol Hill on Sunday, compelling Democrats who have long advocated a tough approach to Iran to push for a vote to restrict Trump under the War Powers Act.
More than 60 members of Congress, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, both of New York, called on the Trump administration to seek congressional authorization for any further action. At least one Republican, Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, joined in the call.
U.S. officials emphasized the precise nature of the strike Sunday, indicating the mission had been an isolated military operation with a narrow, if ambitious, goal. But Trump reinforced fears of a broader war on Sunday evening, writing on his social media platform that a change of government could become a policy goal of the administration.
The Pentagon said that seven B-2 Spirit stealth bombers deployed a total of 14 Massive Ordnance Penetrators — 30,000-pound bombs known as "bunker busters," for their ability to destroy facilities buried deep underground — against Fordo, Natanz and Isfahan.
The U.S. operation followed an Israeli campaign that began last week with strikes against Iranian air defenses and nuclear facilities, scientists and research facilities, as well as against military generals, ballistic missile launch pads and storage depots.
Although the U.S. and Israel believe that the American strikes were a strategic victory, some concern remains that Iran may have removed critical equipment and materiel from its site in Fordo — an enrichment facility built deep into the side of a mountain — to an undisclosed location before the U.S. operation began, the Israeli official said.
"That remains a question mark," the official added, while expressing confidence that Israeli intelligence would be aware of any other significant nuclear facilities.
Addressing the nation Saturday night about the attacks, Trump warned Iran that U.S. attacks could continue if it refuses to give up on its nuclear program.
"There will be either peace, or there will be tragedy for Iran, far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days," Trump said, flanked by his vice president, national security advisor and Defense secretary. "Remember, there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal. But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill. Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes."
Across the region Sunday, the question paramount on observers' minds was what shape Iran's response would take.
Iranian officials downplayed the strikes' impact, acknowledging damage to nuclear facilities but that the know-how remained intact.
The U.S. and Israel "should know this industry has roots in our country, and the roots of this national industry cannot be destroyed,' said Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokesman of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, according to a Sunday interview with the semiofficial Tasnim News Agency.
"Of course, we have suffered some losses, but this is not the first time that the industry has suffered damage. … Naturally, this industry must continue and its growth will not stop.'
Hassan Abedini, the deputy political director of state broadcaster IRIB, said that the three targeted nuclear sites already had been emptied some time before the attacks and that they 'didn't suffer a major blow because the materials had already been taken out."
Other officials, including leaders in the targeted areas in Natanz, Isfahan and Fordo, reassured residents that there was no nuclear contamination as a result of the strikes and that they could 'go on with their lives,' according to a statement Sunday from government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani.
The U.S. attacks drew swift pleas for restraint from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, which both issued statements calling on all parties to de-escalate. Iraq, meanwhile, said the U.S. escalation 'constitutes a grave threat to peace and security in the Middle East,' according to an interview with its government spokesman on Qatari broadcaster Al Jazeera.
Oman, a key mediator in the negotiations between Tehran and Washington, was more scathing, expressing what it said was its 'denunciation and condemnation' of the U.S. attacks.
In Europe, as well, governments urged caution and affirmed support for Israel.
"We have consistently been clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon and can no longer pose a threat to regional security," France, Germany and Italy, known as the E3, said in a statement. "Our aim continues to be to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon."
The last significant face-off between Iran and the United States happened during Trump's first term, when he ordered the assassination of top Iranian commander Gen. Qassem Suleimani in 2020.
That attack spurred predictions of a furious retaliation, with fears of Tehran deploying its missile arsenal or activating its network of regional militias to attack U.S. forces and interests across Washington's footprint in the region. Instead, Tehran reacted with little more than an openly telegraphed ballistic missile barrage on a U.S. base in Iraq.
Iran's options are even more limited this time. Much of that network — known as the "Axis of Resistance" and which included militias and pro-Tehran governments in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Gaza, Afghanistan and Yemen — in incapacitated after more than 20 months of Israeli attacks.
Allies such as Russia and China, despite issuing condemnations of the U.S. attack, appear to have little appetite for involvement beyond statements and offers of mediation. And how much remains of Tehran's missile arsenal is unclear, with the Israeli official estimating roughly 1,000 ballistic missiles — half of their capacity before the most recent conflict started — remaining available to them.
Nevertheless, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps warned that the United States should expect 'regrettable responses.'
'Instead of learning from repeated failures, Washington effectively placed itself on the front lines of aggression by directly attacking peaceful installations,' Guard Corps said in a statement Sunday. It hinted that its targets would include U.S. military presence in the region.
'The number, dispersion, and size of U.S. military bases in the region are not a strength, but have doubled their vulnerability,' the statement said.
Read more: What to know about U.S. 'bunker buster' bombs unleashed on Iran's Fordo nuclear facility
The United States has more than 40,000 troops stationed in the region, according to Pentagon figures, and has bases in at least 10 countries there, not to mention a significant presence at sea.
Yet experts say the likeliest scenario would involve disruptions to shipping lanes, with Iran leveraging its control of the Strait of Hormuz, an oil transit chokepoint handling a fifth of the world's energy flows, that is 21 miles wide at its narrowest point; or calling on Yemen's Houthis to intensify their harassment campaign of merchant vessels on the Red Sea.
It is a situation in which Iran has experience: During its conflict with Iraq in the 1980s, Tehran engaged in the 'Tanker War,' attacking hundreds of Iraqi ships near Hormuz and entering into direct confrontations with the U.S. Navy.
Shipping companies are already girding themselves for disruptions. But Danish shipping giant Maersk said it was continuing to use the Strait of Hormuz for the time being.
'We will continuously monitor the security risk to our specific vessels in the region and are ready to take operational actions as needed,' Maersk said in a statement.
Wilner reported from Washington and Bulos from Beirut.
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter. Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond, in your inbox twice per week.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Putin Sends Trump Clear Message After U.S. Strikes on Iran
Russian President Vladimir Putin on Monday condemned Israel and U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran. Iran sent Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi to Moscow on Monday to lobby Putin for more support against Israel's act of war. 'The absolutely unprovoked aggression against Iran has no basis and no justification,' Putin said to Araghchi during the meeting. 'We have long-standing, good, reliable relations with Iran. Russia and Iran are old allies. And while Putin has offered mediation and rhetorical reassurance, he has stopped short of fully joining the war or offering more concrete assistance, likely due to fear of further alienating President Trump and the U.S. in the midst of his own war on Ukraine. On Sunday, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, a top Putin ally, noted in a series of X posts that 'a number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their own nuclear warheads.' This news, if true, could have cataclysmic implications. Iran is reportedly still weighing retaliation options against Israel and the United States. And how much actual support Russia can and will provide remains to be seen.
Forbes
27 minutes ago
- Forbes
‘Everyone, Keep Oil Prices Down,' Trump Says Without Context
President Donald Trump issued a warning to keep oil prices down in a cryptic Truth Social post Monday that comes amid fears oil and gas prices could surge if Iran retaliates against U.S. strikes by shutting down the Strait of Hormuz. President Donald Trump returns to the White House prior to a meeting with his National Security ... More Council to discuss the ongoing conflict between Iran and Israel on June 21, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Craig Hudson For The Washington Post via Getty Images) The Washington Post via Getty Images 'Everyone, keep oil prices down,' Trump said in an all-caps post, writing 'I'm watching! You're playing right into the hands of the enemy. Don't do it!' It's unclear who Trump was referring to, but it's possible he was addressing oil producers. In a subsequent post directed at the Department of Energy, Trump wrote 'DRILL, BABY, DRILL!!! And I mean NOW!!!' The Energy Department does not drill for oil, but manages the Strategic Petroleum Reserve and provides research and policy support related to oil production, among other industry-adjacent functions. Oil prices were flat Monday following the U.S. military's surprise attacks on three Iranian nuclear facilities over the weekend, but analysts warned prices could surge if Iran retaliates by closing the Strait of Hormuz, a key transportation route for oil and gas that links the Persian Gulf to the Arabian Sea. 30%. That's how much oil prices could rise, to up to $110 per barrel, if Iran moves to close the Strait and oil flow declines 50% for at least one month, Goldman Sachs cautioned Monday. Prices for international oil were flat Monday at $77 per barrel by 10 a.m. EDT. Key Background Iran has vowed to respond to the attack, with its Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi tweeting early Sunday that it 'reserves all options,' calling the attack 'outrageous' and vowing that it would 'have everlasting consequences.' Iranian parliament has approved a plan to potentially shut down the Strait, Iranian state media reported after the U.S. attacks Saturday. A quarter of global oil and 20% of liquefied natural gas is transported through the 90-mile waterway, according to The New York Times, which notes most of the oil that passes through the Strait goes to Asia. Iran would likely shut down the Strait by lacing it with mines, requiring the U.S. military to engage in a potentially dangerous demining operation, The Times notes. Rising Oil Prices Could Spike Another 30% If Iran Blocks Strait Of Hormuz, Goldman Warns (Forbes) U.S. Strikes Iran: 'Suspicious Package' Halts Miami Metro As U.S. Cities On Alert (Forbes) Trump's Strike On Iran Draws Criticism From Democrats—World Leaders Call For De-escalation (Forbes)
Los Angeles Times
27 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
GOP tax bill would ease regulations on gun silencers and some rifles and shotguns
WASHINGTON — The massive tax and spending cuts package that President Trump wants on his desk by July 4 would loosen regulations on gun silencers and certain types of rifles and shotguns, advancing a longtime priority of the gun industry as Republican leaders in the House and Senate try to win enough votes to pass the bill. The guns provision was first requested in the House by Georgia Rep. Andrew Clyde, a Republican gun store owner who had initially opposed the larger tax package. The House bill would remove silencers — called 'suppressors' by the gun industry — from a 1930s law that regulates firearms that are considered the most dangerous, eliminating a $200 tax while removing a layer of background checks. The Senate kept the provision on silencers in its version of the bill and expanded upon it, adding short-barreled, or sawed-off, rifles and shotguns. Republicans who have long supported the changes, along with the gun industry, say the tax infringes on Second Amendment rights. They say silencers are mostly used by hunters and target shooters for sport. 'Burdensome regulations and unconstitutional taxes shouldn't stand in the way of protecting American gun owners' hearing,' said Clyde, who owns two gun stores in Georgia and often wears a pin shaped like an assault rifle on his suit lapel. Democrats are fighting to stop the provision, which was unveiled days after two Minnesota state legislators were shot in their homes, as the bill speeds through the Senate. They argue that loosening regulations on silencers could make it easier for criminals and active shooters to conceal their weapons. 'Parents don't want silencers on their streets, police don't want silencers on their streets,' said Senate Democratic leader Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y. The gun language has broad support among Republicans and has received little attention as House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., work to settle differences within the party on cuts to Medicaid and energy tax credits, among other issues. But it is just one of hundreds of policy and spending items included to entice members to vote for the legislation that could have broad implications if the bill is enacted within weeks, as Trump wants. Inclusion of the provision is also a sharp turn from the climate in Washington just three years ago when Democrats, like Republicans now, controlled Congress and the White House and pushed through bipartisan gun legislation. The bill increased background checks for some buyers under the age of 21, made it easier to take firearms from potentially dangerous people and sent millions of dollars to mental health services in schools. Passed in the summer of 2022, just weeks after the shooting of 19 children and two adults at a school in Uvalde, Texas, it was the most significant legislative response to gun violence in decades. Three years later, as they try to take advantage of their consolidated power in Washington, Republicans are packing as many of their longtime priorities as possible, including the gun legislation, into the massive, wide-ranging bill that Trump has called 'beautiful.' 'I'm glad the Senate is joining the House to stand up for the Second Amendment and our Constitution, and I will continue to fight for these priorities as the Senate works to pass President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill,' said Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who was one of the lead negotiators on the bipartisan gun bill in 2022 but is now facing a primary challenge from the right in his bid for reelection next year. If the gun provisions remain in the larger legislation and it is passed, silencers and the short-barrel rifles and shotguns would lose an extra layer of regulation that they are subject to under the National Firearms Act, passed in the 1930s in response to concerns about mafia violence. They would still be subject to the same regulations that apply to most other guns — and that includes possible loopholes that allow some gun buyers to avoid background checks when guns are sold privately or online. Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, who supports the legislation, says changes are aimed at helping target shooters and hunters protect their hearing. He argues that the use of silencers in violent crimes is rare. 'All it's ever intended to do is to reduce the report of the firearm to hearing safe levels,' Keane says. Speaking on the floor before the bill passed the House, Rep. Clyde said the bill restores Second Amendment rights from 'over 90 years of draconian taxes.' Clyde said Johnson included his legislation in the larger bill 'with the purest of motive.' 'Who asked for it? I asked,' said Clyde, who ultimately voted for the bill after the gun silencer provision was added. Clyde was responding to Rep. Maxwell Frost, a 28-year-old Florida Democrat, who went to the floor and demanded to know who was responsible for the gun provision. Frost, who was a gun-control activist before being elected to Congress, called himself a member of the 'mass shooting generation' and said the bill would help 'gun manufacturers make more money off the death of children and our people.' Among other concerns, control advocates say less regulation for silencers could make it harder for law enforcement to stop an active shooter. 'There's a reason silencers have been regulated for nearly a century: They make it much harder for law enforcement and bystanders to react quickly to gunshots,' said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. Schumer and other Democrats are trying to convince the Senate parliamentarian to drop the language as she reviews the bill for policy provisions that aren't budget-related. 'Senate Democrats will fight this provision at the parliamentary level and every other level with everything we've got,' Schumer said earlier this month. Jalonick writes for the Associated Press.
