Trump says no decision yet on U.S. joining Israel's attacks on Iran, after Iran warns it would risk "all-out war"
What we know about Trump's looming decision on bombing Iran's nuclear sites with Israel
President Trump said Wednesday that he had not yet decided whether the U.S. military should join Israel's ongoing attacks on Iran, and he didn't believe it was too late to reach a deal with the Islamic Republic on its nuclear program, though he warned it was "very late to be talking."
"I may do it, I may not do it. Nobody knows what I'm going to do," Mr. Trump told reporters when he was asked about the U.S. taking part in the strikes on Iran's nuclear and military facilities.
Iran has readied missiles and equipment for strikes on U.S. bases in the region if the U.S. joins Israel's war efforts against Iran, according to a senior U.S. intelligence official and a Pentagon official briefed on the matter.
Asked if he believed it was too late to negotiate a new deal to curb Iran's nuclear program — which he has made clear he wants the Iranian government to abandon completely — Mr. Trump said: "Nothing's too late."
Mr. Trump said the Iranians had sought talks, and said they had even suggested sending a delegation for discussions at the White House.
President Trump speaks to journalists as workers install a large flag pole on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, D.C., June 18, 2025.
BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty
"I said, 'it's really late. You know?' I said, 'it's very late to be talking,'" the president said, adding: "There's a big difference between now and a week ago," before Israel started hammering Iran with airstrikes.
In a social media post, Iran's mission to the United Nations appeared to respond directly to Mr. Trump's remarks, saying: "No Iranian official has ever asked to grovel at the gates of the White House."
"The only thing more despicable than his lies is his cowardly threat to 'take out' Iran's Supreme Leader," the post said. "Iran does NOT negotiate under duress, shall NOT accept peace under duress, and certainly NOT with a has-been warmonger clinging to relevance. Iran shall respond to any threat with a counter-threat, and to any action with reciprocal measures."
An Iranian official had warned earlier Wednesday that any U.S. intervention in the conflict with Israel would risk "all-out war," as the unprecedented exchange of fire with warplanes and ballistic missiles entered a sixth day.
Overnight, a fresh barrage of Israeli missiles streaked across the skies of Tehran. Most were taken out by Iran's air defenses, but the Israeli military and the United Nations' nuclear watchdog agency said another site linked to Iran's nuclear program was hit.
Missiles fired from Iran are seen streaking across the skies over Hebron, in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, June 18, 2025.
Wisam Hashlamoun/Anadolu/Getty
Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Israel Defense Forces spokesman Brigadier General Effie Defrin said the "extensive operation" overnight involved more than 50 fighter jets deployed for three waves of strikes, during which "we struck a centrifuge production site that was intended to enable the regime to continue to enhance its uranium enrichment. This complements actions from previous operations we have conducted targeting components of the nuclear program."
The U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency said in a social media post that it had "information that two centrifuge production facilities in Iran, the TESA Karaj workshop and the Tehran Research Center, were hit," adding that "both sites were previously under IAEA monitoring and verification as part of the JCPOA" — the international Iran nuclear deal that Mr. Trump withdrew the U.S. from unilaterally during his first term.
Iran retaliated with another wave of missiles launched at Israel by the country's Islamic Revolutionary Guard. Sirens blared in Israel to warn they were on the way, but the missiles were intercepted, with explosions seen in the skies over Tel Aviv, Jerusalem and the occupied West Bank.
The steady exchange of fire has taken an escalating cost in human lives. Iranian authorities have provided no updates since saying over the weekend that more than 220 people were killed. The U.S.-based Human Rights Activists in Iran organization, which relies on a network of contacts in the country, said Tuesday that it had documented at least 452 deaths in Iran since Israel launched its attacks, including 109 confirmed military personnel, 224 civilians and 119 people it could not immediately identify.
The war has also sparked an exodus from Iran's capital Tehran with video showing thousands of vehicles at a near standstill on primary exit routes. Those frantic escape bids were fueled by Mr. Trump's direct warning to Tehran's roughly 10 million inhabitants earlier this week to "evacuate immediately."
While Israel has been able to inflict far greater damage on Iran, it has not been immune to the suffering. At least 24 people have been killed by Iranian missiles that slip through the country's robust air defenses.
Bella Ashkinaze, 90, and her husband Chaim were asleep in their apartment building near Tel Aviv on Sunday when an Iranian missile smashed into their home. Bella died and was buried this week in an emotional farewell. Her granddaughter Shani Boana told CBS News her grandparents were both too frail to keep going to their bomb shelters every time the sirens blared.
"I wish I could turn back time and to take her to the safe room," she said. "I am going to miss her a lot… but I still think that we need to do what it takes to stop that threat [from Iran]."
Israel has advised its citizens to remain close to bomb shelters, and the U.S. embassy said it would be closed from Wednesday until at least Saturday.
Iran warns of "all-out war" if U.S. joins Israeli strikes
"I think any American intervention would be a recipe for an all-out war in the region with very, very bad consequences for the whole international community," Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei told Al Jazeera English on Wednesday, adding that he did not believe the Trump administration could dictate to Israel what it could and could not do.
Ali Bahreini, Iran's ambassador in Geneva and a senior diplomat from the country, said Tehran would "respond strongly" to what he called the ongoing Israeli "aggression," and he warned that Iran would do the same against the United States if U.S. forces join the conflict.
In a statement later aired on Iranian state TV, supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei said the U.S. "should know that any military intervention will undoubtedly result in irreparable damage."
"Those who know Iran's history know that Iranians do not answer well to the language of threats," Khamenei said, adding that Iran "will never surrender."
He also said Israel had made a "huge mistake," which the country would be "punished for."
Iranian men hold the flags of Lebanon's Hezbollah and of Iran, along with a portrait of Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, during a rally to condemn Israeli attacks on Iran, in downtown Tehran, June 14, 2025.
Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto/Getty
The defiant messages came after President Trump issued a stern warning on Tuesday, demanding an "unconditional surrender" by Iran's clerical rulers.
Asked Wednesday at the White House what he meant by those two words, Mr. Trump said: "Very simple — unconditional surrender. That means I've had it. I've had it. I give up, no more. Then we go blow up all the nuclear stuff that's all over the place there. They had bad intentions. You know, for 40 years they've been saying, death to America, death to Israel, death to anybody else that they didn't like. They were bullies. They were schoolyard bullies, and now they're not bullies anymore."
Mr. Trump had threatened the country's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, directly on Tuesday, saying the U.S. knew where he was but that it would not kill him, yet. He added: "Our patience is wearing thin."
Khamenei, in his Wednesday address, called Mr. Trump's ultimatum "unacceptable."
The Trump administration has insisted since Israel launched its first strikes on Iran that the U.S. military is not taking part directly in the attacks. But five sources familiar with the matter told CBS News on Tuesday that Mr. Trump is now considering joining the strikes, including potential attacks on Iran's secretive Fordo nuclear enrichment facility. The site is buried deep under a mountain, and Israel is thought to need U.S. warplanes to effectively strike the facility.
Two sources told CBS News on Wednesday that Israel has not requested that the U.S. join its effort in Iran militarily. They said that decision was for Mr. Trump to make with his advisers, and that Israel has its own plans and feels it is able to proceed alone.
There's disagreement among Mr. Trump's close advisers about taking direct action along with Israel, CBS News' sources said Tuesday, but the U.S. military has sent additional warplanes from their home bases to Europe, which analysts believe could be preparation for a greater role in the Mideast.
CBS News' partner network BBC News said Tuesday that its own analysis of flight tracking data had verified at least 30 American military aircraft flying from bases in the U.S. to Europe over the previous three days - all tanker aircraft used to re-fuel fighter jets and bombers. Data from the Flightradar24 tracking website showed at least seven of the planes - all KC-135 Stratotankers - had stopped at U.S. bases in Spain, Scotland and England.
Justin Bronk, a senior analyst at the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi) think tank in London, told the BBC the deployments were "highly suggestive" of U.S. military contingency plans to "support intensive combat operations" in the Middle East in the days ahead.
contributed to this report.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New ‘bonus' tax deduction up to $6,000 could be on the way for those age 65 or older
If the massive tax package currently being debated in Congress becomes law, Americans who are 65 and older will enjoy a hefty new tax break: An additional $4,000 to $6,000 drop in taxable income, thanks to a new additional standard deduction. The House version of the tax bill calls for a $4,000 additional deduction, while the Senate version ramps that up to $6,000. The House approved its version in May, and the Senate is working now to bring its version to a vote. Then the two chambers will need to massage each bill into one cohesive whole, before sending it to President Donald Trump for signature. The potential bad news for taxpayers? There would be income limits, with the value of the tax break phasing out starting at a modified adjusted gross income of $75,000 for single filers and $150,000 for married-filing-jointly filers. This new tax break would be temporary, in effect only from 2025 through 2028. 'The bottom line is if you're in the modified adjusted gross income that gets this, it will save you on taxes,' says Mark Gallegos, a CPA and tax partner at Porte Brown LLC in Chicago. This would put 'more money back in people's pockets, and I think that's the whole point,' he says. House version Senate version Additional standard deduction $4,000 $6,000 Income limits Starts to phase out at income of $75,000 for single filers, $150,000 for couples Starts to phase out at income of $75,000 for single filers, $150,000 for couples Permanent or temporary? Temporary; in effect from 2025 through 2028 Temporary; in effect from 2025 through 2028 Available to taxpayers who itemize? Yes Yes It seems likely that this new tax break would be added on top of the existing additional standard deduction that Americans who are 65 and older already enjoy. In 2025, that additional standard deduction is worth $2,000 for a single filer aged 65 or older, or $3,200 for a married-filing-jointly couple if both spouses are age 65 or older (if just one spouse is 65+, the additional deduction is $1,600). Neither the House nor Senate proposals are clear about whether the new tax break would be added on to that existing tax perk, says Mark Luscombe, a CPA and principal analyst for Wolters Kluwer Tax & Accounting in Chicago. Nothing indicates that it would replace the existing additional deduction, 'so my interpretation is it's in addition,' Luscombe says. Keep in mind, too, that both bills propose an increase to the existing standard deduction that's available to all taxpayers. This gets a bit complicated, so let's back up a bit: The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act essentially doubled the value of the standard deduction, effective from 2018 through 2025. Now, both the House and Senate tax bills would make that tax change permanent. On top of that, each of the bills would give the standard deduction a slight bump: The House bill would temporarily increase the standard deduction by $2,000 for joint filers, $1,500 for head of household filers and $1,000 for single filers and those married filing separately, effective 2025 through 2028. The Senate bill would permanently increase the standard deduction by those same amounts, starting in 2026. So if one of these bills becomes law, then taxpayers aged 65 or older would enjoy the slightly higher standard deduction, plus their regular additional standard deduction, plus the new additional standard deduction. Here's an example of how these tax breaks would work, assuming the Senate's $6,000 version becomes law and assuming the new tax break is on top of the existing additional deduction. Example based on Senate's proposed bill A 70-year-old single taxpayer with taxable income of $50,000 in 2026 likely would qualify for these deductions: $16,000 standard deduction $2,000 existing additional standard deduction $6,000 new additional standard deduction That adds up to a $24,000 total deduction. Thus, $50,000 minus $24,000 = $26,000 taxable income. That reduction in taxable income would drop the taxpayer into the 12 percent tax bracket, from the 22 percent tax bracket. Learn more: Current tax brackets and federal income tax rates This new additional standard deduction would be in lieu of tax-free Social Security benefits for retirees, an idea touted by Trump on the campaign trail. That's because changing how Social Security benefits are taxed would be complex — and costly, reducing government revenues by as much as $1.5 trillion over 10 years, according to an estimate by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center. Adding an extra standard deduction is simpler and cheaper. The $4,000 proposal in the House bill would reduce government revenue by an estimated $66 billion over 10 years, according to a report from the Bipartisan Policy Center. Also, the proposed tax break would help out lower-income taxpayers more than ending taxes on Social Security benefits would have, Luscombe says. For one, Social Security beneficiaries with lower incomes generally don't owe taxes on their benefits — that's a fate that hits higher-income beneficiaries. Plus, the proposed new tax break – both the Senate and House versions — has income limits that would skew the benefit toward lower-income taxpayers. 'This proposal has a phase-out, which is unusual for a standard deduction,' Luscombe says. 'That would tend to focus it on lower- to middle-income taxpayers.' Also unusual for a standard deduction? This one would be available to people who itemize their deductions. Still, 'very few people at these income levels are itemizing,' Luscombe says. 'Only about 10 percent of taxpayers currently itemize, even with the current standard deduction.' Learn more: How to choose between claiming the standard deduction and itemizing
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Vietnam, US, hold negotiations on new trade deal, ministry says
HANOI (Reuters) -Vietnam and the United States held an online round of negotiations on a new trade deal on Thursday night, the Ministry of Industry and Trade said on Friday. During the negotiations with U.S. Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick and Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, Vietnamese trade minister Nguyen Hong Dien asked the U.S. to review "reciprocal tariffs" and market access for Vietnam's key exports, the ministry said in a statement.
New York Times
36 minutes ago
- New York Times
Appeals Court Lets Trump Keep Control of California National Guard in L.A.
A federal appeals court on Thursday cleared the way for President Trump to keep using the National Guard to respond to immigration protests in Los Angeles, declaring that a judge in San Francisco erred last week when he ordered Mr. Trump to return control of the troops to Gov. Gavin Newsom of California. In a unanimous, 38-page ruling, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the conditions in Los Angeles were sufficient for Mr. Trump to decide that he needed to take federal control of California's National Guard and deploy it to ensure that federal immigration laws would be enforced. The panel — made up of two appointees of Mr. Trump and one of former President Joseph R. Biden Jr. — rejected a lower-court judge's conclusion that the protests were so unruly that they could trigger a rarely-used law that Mr. Trump invoked when he claimed the power to federalize the National Guard over Mr. Newsom's objections. Greg Jaffe contributed reporting.
