Israel-Iran war: Trump weighs US strike; Netanyahu cites 'personal cost'
A week into the war between Israel and Iran, tensions continue to rise as missile strikes, and drone attacks continue . The conflict was triggered by Israeli airstrikes on Iranian nuclear and military targets last Friday, prompting swift retaliation from Tehran.
Hundreds have died, and fears are mounting of a wider regional escalation.
In the midst of this turmoil, President Donald Trump said he will decide within two weeks whether the United States will intervene militarily, depending on the prospect of renewed nuclear negotiations. Israeli leaders, meanwhile, continue to issue aggressive statements, with Defence Minister Israel Katz saying Iran's Supreme Leader 'should not continue to exist.'
Here are 10 key developments:
Trump: Decision on US strike in 'next two weeks'
President Donald Trump has said he will decide 'within two weeks' whether the US military will become directly involved in the conflict. His remarks, delivered by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, signal a short diplomatic window to avoid further escalation.
Trump said from the Oval Office, 'I'm not looking to fight. But if it's a choice between fighting and having a nuclear weapon, you have to do what you have to do.'
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Trade Bitcoin & Ethereum – No Wallet Needed!
IC Markets
Start Now
Undo
He added, 'I may do it, I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do. Nothing is finished until it is finished. The next week is going to be very big — maybe less than a week.'
His comments come amid reports that the US is considering striking Iran's underground Fordo facility, which is heavily fortified and believed to be unreachable except by America's 'bunkerbuster' bombs.
IRGC intel chief among those targeted by Israel
Israel's opening strikes last Friday reportedly killed several senior Iranian officials, including key figures in Iran's nuclear and military command.
Among them was the intelligence chief of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), although Tehran has not officially confirmed his death.
The strikes were aimed at Iran's nuclear research hubs, ballistic missile sites, and facilities linked to the IRGC's Quds Force. Israel's strategy appears to be focused on decapitating Iran's ability to launch retaliatory operations and to disrupt nuclear infrastructure, which it believes poses an existential threat.
While the Israeli military has remained tightlipped on identities, analysts believe the loss of senior IRGC figures will have significant implications for Iran's military coordination and may have triggered the intensity of its missile response.
Cluster bomb used in strike on Israeli hospital
An Iranian missile that struck Soroka Medical Center in Beersheba, Israel, was rigged with a cluster munition warhead, according to Israel's Home Front Command. This type of weapon carries dozens of submunitions that explode on impact, posing severe risks over a wide area.
The strike wounded at least 80 patients and medical staff. Although most injuries were minor, the hospital's infrastructure suffered heavy damage. Gas, water and airconditioning systems were all disrupted.
Iran denied targeting the hospital, claiming the missile was aimed at a nearby Israeli military tech facility. An Israeli military official, speaking anonymously, admitted there was no specific intelligence suggesting Iran planned to hit the hospital.
Israel's hospitals, including Soroka, had preemptively moved vulnerable patients underground. This preparedness likely saved lives during the strike.
'
Khamenei
should not continue to exist,' Says Israel Katz
Israel's Defence Minister, Israel Katz, directly blamed Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei for the missile strike on Soroka Medical Center. Katz said Israel's military 'has been instructed and knows that in order to achieve all of its goals, this man absolutely should not continue to exist.'
His statement was one of the most direct threats ever issued by an Israeli official against Iran's top leader. While Israel has often accused Khamenei of orchestrating regional terrorism, such overt calls for his elimination are rare and risky.
US officials later said President Trump had vetoed an Israeli plan to assassinate Khamenei. Trump confirmed there were 'no plans to kill him, at least not for now.'
The war of words has added fuel to an already explosive situation and underscores the deeply personal nature of the conflict's rhetoric.
US military aircraft no longer visible in Qatar: Satellite images
New satellite imagery has revealed a notable absence of visible US military aircraft at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, one of Washington's most strategic sites in the region. The images, captured on Thursday, show that aircraft normally stationed at the base have either been relocated or concealed.
While the US Department of Defense has not confirmed any repositioning, analysts say this could be part of a strategic redeployment to either prepare for a strike or to shield key assets from potential Iranian retaliation.
Military watchers suggest the US may be trying to reduce its exposure ahead of Trump's decision. Others believe assets may have been repositioned to naval platforms in the Persian Gulf, which are harder to detect and more flexible in combat operations.
Netanyahu
reveals 'personal cost' of war with Iran
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faced fierce backlash after citing his son's postponed wedding as a symbol of personal sacrifice during wartime. Standing in front of the missilestruck Soroka hospital, he said, 'Each of us bears a personal cost, and my family has not been exempt.'
'This is the second time that my son Avner has cancelled a wedding due to missile threats. It is a personal cost for his fiancée as well, and I must say that my dear wife is a hero, and she bears a personal cost.'
He continued: 'It really reminds me of the British people during the blitz. We are going through a blitz.'
While Netanyahu intended to strike a Churchillian tone, the remarks were ridiculed online, with critics accusing him of being emotionally detached from the actual suffering of citizens.
With over 20 Israeli civilian deaths already reported, many found the analogy inappropriate.
Geneva diplomatic talks offer glimmer of Hope
A diplomatic opening may be emerging, with Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi scheduled to meet EU and UK leaders in Geneva. British Foreign Secretary David Lammy said, 'A window now exists within the next two weeks to achieve a diplomatic solution.' The meetings follow President Trump's statement allowing a two-week pause before making a military decision.
EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas and representatives from France and Germany will also participate.
The talks aim to halt escalation and revive negotiations around Iran's nuclear capabilities.
Internet blackout in Iran obscures situation
With Iranian internet access restricted, information about the strikes and casualties has become increasingly difficult to verify. Israel had warned civilians in the city of Rasht to evacuate industrial zones ahead of targeted airstrikes.
However, it's unclear how widely that warning was received. In Tehran and Isfahan, residents reported hearing anti-aircraft fire. The media blackout has complicated the international response and has limited humanitarian organisations' ability to assess needs on the ground.
US-Israel alignment under scrutiny
Although Trump and Netanyahu share strategic goals, including deterring Iran's nuclear development, they appear to diverge tactically.
Trump vetoed an Israeli plan to assassinate Ayatollah Khamenei and has been cautious about direct involvement. However, Netanyahu has said he trusts Trump 'to do what's best for America' and credited Washington for already offering substantial support. The current phase of the conflict may test U.S.
-Israeli coordination like never before, especially if diplomacy fails.
Regional conflict still looms large
While the current battle is between Israel and Iran, the implications stretch far beyond. Iran's close ties to groups like Hezbollah and Hamas raise the risk of a multi-front war. The ongoing Gaza conflict, following Hamas' attack in 2023, has already destabilised the region. Any miscalculation now—whether by airstrike or political move—could draw in additional players and ignite a broader Middle Eastern war.
The coming days will likely prove critical in determining whether diplomacy can rein in the chaos—or whether the region is poised for deeper conflict.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
27 minutes ago
- NDTV
What Is 'Doomsday Plane' Spotted In US Skies Amid Iran-Israel Conflict
New Delhi: As tensions continue to flare between Israel and Iran, and Washington ponders over potential military action against the Islamic Republic, one of the US' most secretive aircraft quietly entered the skies above the US capital. On the night of June 17, the E-4B Nightwatch — a hardened airborne command centre built to keep America's top defence and security officials operational during a nuclear crisis — made a flight to Joint Base Andrews. Known as the 'doomsday plane,' the aircraft was spotted by flight trackers taking an unusually circuitous route to Washington, triggering speculation about its timing and purpose. What is the E-4B Nightwatch? The E-4B Nightwatch is a militarised version of the Boeing 747-200. It was repurposed by the US military into a flying war room. It is formally known as the National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC) and is designed to function as a mobile command post during a nuclear conflict or national catastrophe. When ground-based communication or leadership infrastructure is compromised, the E-4B helps top American officials to continue coordinating operations from the sky. It functions as an airborne command centre, enabling the President, Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff to maintain command, control and communication capabilities during times of national emergency. Why is it called the 'doomsday plane'? The aircraft is built to withstand nuclear blasts, electromagnetic pulses (EMPs) and other extreme disruptions. It is often described as the 'flying Pentagon' because of its ability to operate as a command-and-control centre even in the event of full-scale war. The E-4B has an unrefuelled endurance of 12 hours, but with mid-air refuelling, it is known to have remained airborne for as long as 35.4 hours, according to a report in The New York Post. Is its recent flight a cause of concern? E-4B flights are not uncommon. They are conducted regularly to maintain operational readiness — this particular sortie stood out. As per data from flight tracking site FlightRadar, the aircraft departed Bossier City, Louisiana, shortly before 6 pm, local time, on June 17 and touched down in Maryland around 10 pm, The New York Times reported. What drew attention was the flight path, which curved along the eastern coastline and looped over Virginia and North Carolina before heading to Maryland. Even more unusual was the callsign — instead of the routine ORDER6, the aircraft used ORDER01. E-4B flight amid geopolitical tensions? The flight coincided with an escalation in the ongoing Israel-Iran conflict. US President Donald Trump has demanded Iran's 'unconditional surrender' as the conflict continues to escalate, according to AP. Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, issued a warning to the US, threatening 'irreparable damage' if it directly intervened. FlightRadar data showed two Iranian government aircraft departed the country's airspace on Wednesday for Oman. It fuelled speculation that Iranian officials might be evacuating amid rising tensions, or that urgent diplomatic talks were being arranged in Muscat, Oman's capital, reported The New York Post. How many E-4B aircraft are there? The United States Air Force operates four E-4Bs, all as part of the 1st Airborne Command and Control Squadron. At any given time, at least one aircraft is on high alert and ready for immediate deployment.
Time of India
28 minutes ago
- Time of India
Israel-Iran Conflict: How another Middle East War is ripping MAGA apart - will Trump coalition survive?
As war clouds gather over Tehran, the 'America First' coalition fractures—from Carlson's outrage to Cruz's crusade, with Vice President JD Vance echoing the commander-in-chief's every word. The MAGA Movement Promised No More Wars—Now It's on the Brink of One Donald Trump didn't just win the 2024 election—he crushed it with a promise to rebuild America without stumbling into another foreign disaster. 'No more stupid wars' became doctrine. His base connected with this pledge, proud that he hadn't launched any new wars. But now, deep into 2025, that legacy is under pressure. In June, Israel struck Iran's nuclear facilities—and Trump responded by warning Iran's leaders to surrender 'unconditionally,' advising Tehran's civilians to evacuate, and boasting that the U.S. had 'total control of the skies.' The MAGA movement—defined by its distrust of foreign entanglements—is experiencing an identity crisis. The coalition that brought Trump back to power is now split, torn between instincts that fueled his rise. The Anti-War Wing: Carlson, Bannon, Greene, Gaetz—and the MAGA Grassroots Tucker Carlson: MAGA's Foreign Policy Firewall Carlson has emerged as the vocal anti-war leader within MAGA circles. He warned that war with Iran could end Trump's presidency. During a dramatic on-camera exchange with Senator Ted Cruz, he challenged his hawkish views by questioning basic facts about Iran—its population, its sectarian landscape—and called out what he sees as dangerous ignorance dressed up as resolve. To Carlson, this is Iraq 2.0. And allowing MAGA to shift toward intervention is nothing short of a betrayal. Tucker and Ted Cruz Get Into Heated Debate on AIPAC and Foreign Influence Steve Bannon: The Loyal Dissenter Bannon warned that a war with Iran could destroy the MAGA coalition. Yet he tempered the warning with neutrality, noting that even dissenting voices would ultimately fall in line behind Trump. His message: the base doesn't want war, but Trump remains the centre of gravity. Marjorie Taylor Greene: Culture Warrior, Peace Advocate Greene has remained firm in her opposition to escalation. She's made it clear that another conflict in the Middle East would betray the MAGA movement's core promise: to put America first—at home, not in yet another desert war. Matt Gaetz: The Populist Sceptic Gaetz has voiced deep scepticism over renewed interventionism, warning that MAGA should not fall for recycled Bush-era framing. He's dismissed hawkish rhetoric and cautioned that any move toward war must have a clearly defined exit strategy and real American interests at stake. His message is clear: military might is not a substitute for strategic clarity. The War Caucus: Cruz, Rubio, Levin, Hannity—Old Doctrine, New Labels Ted Cruz: Confident, But Clueless? Cruz maintained a hawkish stance in public appearances, even as he fumbled through basic facts about Iran. He's called Iran a threat and said the U.S. must act if necessary. His slip—confusing Israeli actions with American ones—highlighted the extent to which some MAGA hawks are ready for conflict, regardless of the details. Marco Rubio: From Miami to Mossad Now serving as Secretary of State, Rubio has become the administration's leading voice for a hardline Iran policy. He insists that Iran must be denied not just weapons, but even enrichment capacity. His doctrine is simple: Iran cannot even come close to the nuclear threshold. Mark Levin and Sean Hannity: Reagan-era Revivalists Both Levin and Hannity have called for strong action. Levin has floated the idea of regime change. Hannity has embraced the logic of preemptive strikes. They represent the older, more muscular conservatism that sees war not as a failure—but as assertion of American strength. JD Vance: The Loyal Lieutenant, Not the Peacemaker Vice President JD Vance, once the populist realist, now speaks with tight discipline. He hasn't condemned the hawks. He hasn't echoed the doves. He simply follows the President's lead—repeating Trump's lines, offering no deviation, and avoiding ideological entanglement. Vance is not acting as a bridge between factions. He's acting as a megaphone for Trump. His silence is strategic. His discipline is total with the belief that if he holds on long enough, he's a shoo-in to the be Trump's successor. Trump's Game: Maximum Pressure, Minimum Commitment—So Far Trump has long weaponised ambiguity. He's sent American forces into visible alert, named Iranian leaders, threatened air superiority—and yet, he hasn't fired a shot. This is vintage Trump: threatening force without deploying it, posturing without committing. But the longer this game stretches, the more pressure mounts. Hawks want action. The base wants peace. And Trump, ever the tactician, wants both. MAGA's Iraq Flashback: The Ghost That Haunts Them Still The language is all too familiar. Talks of WMDs. Warning of rogue regimes. Accusations of appeasement. MAGA was born in rebellion against this rhetoric. Trump won hearts by denouncing the Iraq War as a historic failure. Now, those ghosts are back. And the question is whether the movement has truly changed—or merely changed labels. The 2025 Test: Can MAGA Survive a Middle East War? Trump's current coalition—rooted in working-class values, suburban nationalism, and youth anti-establishment sentiment—says no to foreign adventures. Most polls show his base is wary of intervention. But a gamble remains: if Trump escalates, that coalition could fracture. The internal pressure is mounting. MAGA's future depends on whether it keeps its promise—or betrays the fierce anti-war impulse that helped redefine American politics in 2025. The Real War Is Inside MAGA This is more than a foreign policy debate—it's an ideological showdown. Anti-war bloc: Carlson, Bannon, Greene, Gaetz—warning against another Iraq, urging focus at home. War caucus: Cruz, Rubio, Levin, Hannity—championing confrontation and regime change. Intercepted by: JD Vance—standing in lockstep with Trump, no deviation. At the centre: Trump—wielding threats and uncertainties while testing the elasticity of a fractured coalition. A strike on Iran may win a skirmish—but MAGA's soul hangs in the balance. The real question now isn't just 'should we go to war?'—it's 'can MAGA survive it?'
Economic Times
28 minutes ago
- Economic Times
As US weighs Iran strike, Pakistan tries to recast itself as anti-terror ally — and India is watching closely
New Delhi: India is watching closely as Pakistan tries to reinvent itself as a victim of terrorism and is seeking to find a place as a key actor against extremism and a possible ally to the US in the conflict with several accounts, the meeting between Pakistani Field Marshal Asim Munir and US President Donald Trump lasted almost three hours, extending beyond the one hour allocated, and included key US administration advisors for West growing conflict in the region - with the attack on Iranian nuclear facilities by Israel overshadowing other issues and increasingly pointing towards a US intervention - has placed Pakistan in an advantageous position that it will try to leverage, people tracking the situation the core of Pakistani moves, sources feel, is an attempt to rebrand itself from a fountainhead of terrorism to a victim that is seeking Western help to counter outfits that present threats to the West. This is an old plot that Pakistan has successfully played against the West in the past before the discovery of Osama Bin Laden at Abbottabad and the subsequent distancing of the US administration and pulling back of military aid. A renewed attempt is being made, with the Iran crisis coming at a particularly fortunate time for Pakistan as the US looks for allies who can pressurise Tehran and provide support in case American forces decide to enter the battlefield. Sources said Pakistan has managed to find some success in getting to Washington DC by exploiting the gap in the Pentagon that exists due to the structuring of its military commands across the world. The US Central Command (CENTCOM), which deals with Pakistan, is at the centre of action right now due to the troubles in West Asia. The Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) which deals with India and China was earlier more central to decision-making and planning in Washington DC. Its views of Pakistan as a close partner of China, increasingly dependent on Beijing for military equipment, training and intelligence, were a counter to the CENTCOM's motives of using Pakistani support for anti-terror operations in its area of said Pakistan is likely to use the situation to play the US against China, though in the long term it will remain dependent on Beijing for weapons, training and funding. The worry is, that in the short run, Pakistan may bargain to get access to US equipment and technology in the garb of fighting terror. It has been seen in the past, including when India attacked terror camps in Balakot in 2019, that equipment provided to Pakistan to fight terrorism were used against at stake for India will be the partnership with the US that has been growing in the military sphere and includes plans to co-develop cutting edge weapon systems. India has been increasing its dependence on the US for critical defence equipment, including engines for indigenous LCAs, maritime surveillance equipment and satellite difference is that while India is seeking technology and equipment from the US to counter an increasingly aggressive China, Pakistan may try to seek the same against India, in the garb of fighting terrorism.
