B-2 Bombers Moving to Guam amid Middle East Tensions, US Officials Say
The United States is moving B-2 bombers to the Pacific island of Guam, two US officials told Reuters on Saturday, as President Donald Trump weighs whether the United States should take part in Israel's strikes against Iran.
It was unclear whether the bomber deployment is tied to Middle East tensions.
The B-2 can be equipped to carry America's 30,000-pound GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, designed to destroy targets deep underground. That is the weapon that experts say could be used to strike Iran's nuclear program, including Fordow.
The officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, declined to disclose any further details. One official said no forward orders had been given yet to move the bombers beyond Guam. They did not say how many B-2 bombers are being moved.
The Pentagon did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
27 minutes ago
- Arab News
Democrats are at odds over the Israel-Iran war as Trump considers intervening
After nearly two years of stark divisions over the war in Gaza and support for Israel, Democrats are now finding themselves at odds over US policy toward Iran as progressives demand unified opposition to President Donald Trump's consideration of a strike against Tehran's nuclear program while party leaders tread more cautiously. US leaders of all stripes have found common ground for two decades on the position that Iran cannot be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. The longtime US foe has supported groups that have killed Americans across the Mideast and threatens to destroy Israel. But Trump's public flirtation with joining Israel's offensive against Iran may become the Democratic Party's latest schism, just as it is sharply dividing Trump's isolationist 'Make America Great Again' base from more hawkish conservatives. While progressives have staked out clear opposition to Trump's potential actions, the party leadership is playing the safer ground of demanding a role for Congress before Trump could use force against Iran. Many prominent Democrats with 2028 presidential aspirations are staying silent, so far, on the Israel-Iran war. 'They are sort of hedging their bets,' said Joel Rubin, a former deputy assistant secretary of state who served under Democratic President Barack Obama and is now a strategist on foreign policy. 'The beasts of the Democratic Party's constituencies right now are so hostile to Israel's war in Gaza that it's really difficult to come out looking like one would corroborate an unauthorized war that supports Israel without blowback.' Progressive Democrats use Trump's ideas and words Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., has called Trump's consideration of an attack 'a defining moment for our party' and has introduced legislation with Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Kentucky, that calls on the Republican president to 'terminate' the use of US armed forces against Iran unless 'explicitly authorized' by a declaration of war from Congress. Khanna used Trump's own campaign arguments of putting American interests first when the congressman spoke to Theo Von, a comedian who has been supportive of the president and is popular in the 'manosphere.' 'That's going to cost this country a lot of money that should be being spent here at home,' said Khanna, who is said to be among the many Democrats eyeing the party's 2028 primary. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who twice sought the Democratic presidential nomination, pointed to Trump's stated goal during his inaugural speech of being known as 'a peacemaker and a unifier.' 'Very fine words. Trump should remember them today. Supporting Netanyahu's war against Iran would be a catastrophic mistake,' Sanders said about Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Sanders has reintroduced legislation prohibiting the use of federal money for force against Iran, insisted that US military intervention would be unwise and illegal and accused Israel of striking unprovoked. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York signed on to a similar bill from Sanders in 2020, but he is so far holding off this time. Some believe the party should stake out a clear anti-war stance as Trump weighs whether to launch a military offensive that is seemingly counter to the anti-interventionism he promised during his 2024 campaign. 'The leaders of the Democratic Party need to step up and loudly oppose war with Iran and demand a vote in Congress,' said Tommy Vietor, a former Obama aide, on X. Mainstream Democrats are cautious, while critical The staunch support from the Democratic administration of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris for Israel's war against Hamas loomed over the party's White House ticket in 2024, even with the criticism of Israel's handling of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Trump exploited the divisions to make inroads with Arab American voters and Orthodox Jews on his way back to the White House. Today, the Israel-Iran war is the latest test for a party struggling to repair its coalition before next year's midterm elections and the quick-to-follow kickoff to the 2028 presidential race. Bridging the divide between an activist base that is skeptical of foreign interventions and already critical of US support for Israel and more traditional Democrats and independents who make up a sizable, if not always vocal, voting bloc. In a statement after Israel's first strikes, Schumer said Israel has a right to defend itself and 'the United States' commitment to Israel's security and defense must be ironclad as they prepare for Iran's response.' Sen. Jacky Rosen, D-Nevada, was also cautious in responding to the Israeli action and said 'the US must continue to stand with Israel, as it has for decades, at this dangerous moment.' 'It really seems like the Trump and Iran war track is kind of going along like a Formula 1 racetrack, and then the Democrats are in some sort of tricycle or something trying to keep up,' said Ryan Costello, a policy director for the Washington-based National Iranian American Council, which advocates for diplomatic engagement between US and Iran. Other Democrats have condemned Israel's strikes and accused Netanyahu of sabotaging nuclear talks with Iran. They are reminding the public that Trump withdrew in 2018 from a nuclear agreement that limited Tehran's enrichment of uranium in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions negotiated during the Obama administration. 'Trump created the problem,' said Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Connecticut, on X. 'The single reason Iran was so close to obtaining a nuclear weapon is that Trump destroyed the diplomatic agreement that put major, verifiable constraints on their nuclear program.' The progressives' pushback A Pearson Institute/Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll from September 2024 found that about half of Democrats said the US was being 'too supportive' of Israel and about 4 in 10 said their level support was 'about right.' Democrats were more likely than independents and Republicans to say the Israeli government had 'a lot' of responsibility for the continuation of the war between Israel and Hamas. About 6 in 10 Democrats and half of Republicans felt Iran was an adversary with whom the US was in conflict. Democratic Rep. Yassamin Ansari, an Iranian American from Arizona, said Iranians are unwitting victims in the conflict because there aren't shelters or infrastructure to protect civilians from targeted missiles as there are in Israel. 'The Iranian people are not the regime, and they should not be punished for its actions,' Ansari posted on X, while criticizing Trump for fomenting fear among the Iranian population. 'The Iranian people deserve freedom from the barbaric regime, and Israelis deserve security.'
Asharq Al-Awsat
an hour ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Explore World News Today
The US ambassador to Israel said on Saturday the United States has begun 'assisted departure flights' from Israel, the first time such flights have been…
Arab News
an hour ago
- Arab News
Pro-Palestinian protest leader defiant despite US deportation threat
NEWARK, United States: Mahmoud Khalil, one of the most prominent leaders of US pro-Palestinian campus protests, pledged Saturday to keep campaigning after he was released from a federal detention center. 'Even if they would kill me, I would still speak for Palestine,' Khalil said as he was greeted by cheering supporters at Newark airport, just outside New York City. Khalil, a legal permanent resident in the United States who is married to a US citizen and has a US-born son, had been in custody since March facing potential deportation. He was freed from a federal immigration detention center in Louisiana on Friday, hours after a judge ordered his release on bail. The Columbia University graduate was a figurehead of student protests against US ally Israel's war in Gaza, and the Trump administration labeled him a national security threat. 'Just the fact I am here sends a message — the fact that all these attempts to suppress pro-Palestine voices have failed now,' said Khalil, who is still fighting his potential expulsion from the United States. He spoke alongside his wife Noor Abdalla, who gave birth to the couple's first child while Khalil was in detention, as well as Democratic congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. 'Mahmoud Khalil was imprisoned for 104 days by this administration, by the Trump administration, with no grounds and for political reasons, because Mahmoud Khalil is an advocate for Palestinian human rights,' Ocasio-Cortez said. 'This is not over, and we will have to continue to support this case,' she added. Khalil, who was born in Syria to Palestinian parents, is not allowed to leave the United States except for 'self-deportation' under the terms of his release. He also faces restrictions on where he can travel within the country. President Donald Trump's government has justified pushing for Khalil's deportation by saying his continued presence in the United States could carry 'potentially serious adverse foreign policy consequences.' Beyond his legal case, Khalil's team fears he could face threats out of detention. 'We are very mindful about his security, and the irony is that he is the one being persecuted,' Baher Azmy, one of his lawyers, told AFP. 'But he is committed to peace and because he is rejecting US government policy he is under threat,' Azmy added, without elaborating on any security measures in place for Khalil and his family.
