Trump decimates Iran's nuke sites: What next as Khamenei mulls options after devastating blow
Published on Jun 23, 2025 02:39 PM IST
In this episode of Hindustan Times Point Blank, Executive Editor Shishir Gupta delves into the recent 'Operation Midnight Hammer' and unravels the intricate deception tactics employed by the US military. The episode also explains why the U.S.' attack on nuclear sites in Natanz, Fordow & Isfahan, are not just a message to Iran, but to the U.S.' enemy number 1, China. The episode also explores what happens next for Iran, considering the decimation of its nuclear capabilities. With a potential regime change on the horizon, the discussion touches upon the Zahir Shah model in Afghanistan and the possible role of Reza Pahlavi. Watch this video for all the details.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Trump's ‘2 weeks' bluff: Inside the White House decision to secretly strike Iran
When President Donald Trump told the world on June 19 that he'd decide 'within the next two weeks' whether the US would enter the Israel-Iran conflict, few believed the clock would run out so quickly. Just 48 hours later, three of Iran's nuclear sites were bombed by US B-2 stealth bombers in a strike shrouded in secrecy, known only to a handful in Washington. As The Washington Post reports, Trump's now-signature 'two weeks' deadline may have been more strategic smokescreen than genuine hesitation. According to The Washington Post, even as Trump offered the two-week timeline publicly, a strike plan — Operation Midnight Hammer — was already being finalised in the White House. 'Very few people in Washington knew the timing or nature of the plan,' said General Dan Caine, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff. Many officials only learned about it after Trump posted on Truth Social. 'Within the next two weeks.' That was Trump's public timeline. But behind the scenes, the decision had largely been made. According to a senior administration official quoted by The Post, the remark 'was our attempt to throw the Iranians off guard. But there was also some truth to it.' The report by Post reveals that Trump directed military leaders to prepare the strikes even as he asked advisers daily how to keep the mission narrow and avoid a broader war. Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called the mission 'highly classified,' adding that 'very few people in Washington' were aware of its timing or nature. Although Trump said he remained open to a diplomatic solution, he became increasingly inclined toward military action. Talks with Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, facilitated by European officials on Friday , went nowhere. 'He knew there probably wouldn't be a breakthrough, which is why the Pentagon was putting together a plan,' said a senior official to The Washington Post. Another diplomat added, 'Friday's session was a genuine effort by Europeans for diplomacy, but no interest from Iran at all.' Trump's special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, continued back-channel diplomacy throughout the week. But the lack of Iranian flexibility reportedly frustrated the White House. Vice President JD Vance, an Iraq War veteran known for his skepticism about military entanglements, urged caution during internal discussions. He wanted to 'make sure all the tires were kicked.' Yet, as plans progressed, Vance supported the decision. As Israeli strikes degraded Iran's air defenses, the window for a successful US operation widened. Retired Lt. Gen. Charlie 'Tuna' Moore told the Post: 'Israel had achieved air superiority over Iran,' making the US strike far more feasible. A small team, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, DNI Tulsi Gabbard, and press secretary Karoline Leavitt, had been read in on the plan. Contrary to reports of discord, a senior official as per The Post described a sense of 'camaraderie' among the group. The B-2 stealth bombers took off Saturday morning, while Trump was at his golf club in New Jersey and Vance was flying back from California. Neither their travel nor their appearances at fundraisers gave any indication of what was underway. As the bombers entered Iranian airspace, Trump returned to the White House. By 7:50 pm, 20 minutes after the strike concluded, he posted the announcement on Truth Social. In the Situation Room were top officials including Hegseth, Gabbard, Witkoff, Rubio, Gen. Caine, and others. Attorney General Pam Bondi joined the group later. The strike targeted Iran's nuclear sites under Operation Midnight Hammer, marking a sharp shift in US strategy. Just days earlier, Washington had insisted Israel acted alone. But by Tuesday, Trump claimed that the US and Israel had 'complete and total control of the skies over Iran.' According to The Post, while the operation was long in planning, officials said there was no clear moment when Trump decided definitively to go forward. 'It was based on a feeling,' said one senior official. Vance echoed this in a Meet the Press interview: 'I don't know that any of us knew exactly when the president made the decision except for the president himself.' Trump had reviewed the plans on Tuesday and told aides he reserved the right to abort the mission until the final moment. Throughout the week, White House aides consulted with key conservative voices — including Steve Bannon, Charlie Kirk, and Jack Posobiec — to ensure alignment with Trump's base. Though these figures were skeptical of involvement, they didn't change Trump's mind. 'He was listening to people across the ideological perspective,' said a senior official as reported by The Washington Post. 'Ultimately, the president felt this is a decision the base should support, because he's preventing a conflict that very well could have happened if the supreme leader instructed Iran to create the nuclear weapon.'
India.com
an hour ago
- India.com
Diljit Dosanjh To Get Banned? Actor Faces Backlash Over Hania Aamir's Casting In Sardaarji 3
New Delhi: The trailer launch of Sardaarji 3 has stirred controversy among fans of Diljit Dosanjh after it featured Pakistani actress Hania Aamir in a prominent role. Earlier reports had suggested that Aamir had been dropped from the Punjabi blockbuster franchise, but the newly released trailer indicates otherwise. The decision to retain Hania Aamir in the film has sparked outrage among sections of the public and members of the Indian film industry. Some have even labeled the move as 'anti-national.' As of now, the trailer is reportedly unavailable for viewing in India, and the film is not expected to be released in the country. The controversy comes in the wake of the brutal Pahalgam attack. According to a report by Hindustan Times, the President of the Federation of Western India Cine Employees (FWICE), B.N. Tiwari, has strongly criticized Diljit Dosanjh for collaborating with a Pakistani actor and has called for a complete ban on his future projects. 'By collaborating with a Pakistani actor, Diljit has hurt Indian sentiments, disrespected the nation, and insulted the sacrifices of our brave soldiers,' Tiwari told Hindustan Times. Objecting to the film's release in India, he further emphasised: 'Diljit working with a Pakistani actor is something we are not ready to overlook.' He added: 'We have heard that the film is not being released in India. But if they plan to release it, we will ban it. For now, they are releasing it overseas only. That being said, Diljit working with a Pakistani actor is something we are not ready to overlook. We have called for a strict ban on all his upcoming films, songs, or any other projects. We will also issue a formal letter on the same today. Along with Diljit, we have also called for a ban on the producers of the film regarding all their upcoming projects.' Ashoke Pandit, President of the Indian Film and Television Directors' Association, stated: 'We had written a letter to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) earlier, and they refused to grant the film a certificate. I have seen Hania's tweets during Operation Sindoor as well. We will take action and ask producers not to work with him [Diljit]. He should be completely boycotted by music labels and the Punjabi film industry. Diljit is a compulsive Pakistani lover.' About Sardaarji 3 In the Punjabi film, Diljit plays the role of a ghost hunter tasked with removing a spirit from a mansion in the United Kingdom. Following the Pahalgam terror attack, several film federations called for a complete ban on Pakistani artistes working in India. Additionally, Instagram accounts of Pakistani celebrities such as Hania Aamir, Ali Zafar, and Mahira Khan were restricted in India. In the horror-comedy, both Hania Aamir and Neeru Bajwa are seen romancing Diljit. Sharing the trailer on Instagram, Diljit captioned it: "Sardaar Ji 3 Releasing 27th June OVERSEAS Only. FADH LAO BHOOND DIAN LATTAN.' The film also stars Manav Vij, Gulshan Grover, Jasmin Bajwa, Sapna Pabbi, and others in prominent roles. It is directed by Amar Hundal.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
'Why no regime change in Iran?': Trump's big hint as he contradicts Vance, Hegseth amid mid-east crisis
US President Donald Trump recent remarks on Iran paints a picture of contradiction from his his top allies' that the United States wasn't attempting a 'regime change' in Iran. Trump questioned Sunday the possibility of regime change in Iran following US military strikes against key Iranian military sites over the weekend. His remarks came after the US sent 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs crashing into the mountain above Iran's Fordow nuclear site with Tehran vowing to defend itself at all costs. After the US bombed key Iranian nuclear facilities- Fordow, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear facilities- over the weekend, key members of Trump's inner circle notably Vice President JD Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio–has been in damage control. In a Truth Social post on Sunday, Trump unravelled the narrative that the strikes on Iran were not leading up to a 'regime change' in the region. Trump appeared to support a potential regime change in Iran, seemingly contradicting his own administration's stand that 'Operation Midnight Hammer' was not aimed at bringing a regime change in Iran. 'It's not politically correct to use the term, 'Regime Change,' but if the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? MIGA!!!' he wrote. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like So kostet der elektrische Rollstuhl fast nichts! Senioren Focus Weiterlesen Undo The president's latest comments contradict his closest allies after the US joined Israel in strikes against three nuclear Iranian sites on Saturday. ALSO READ: 'God help us all': Trump's appointment of 22-year-old college grad to terrorism unit amid Iran crisis faces backlash Live Events Vance says US does not want a regime change But what is worth noting is that US President JD Vance's remark was not on the similar lines. On Sunday Vance insisted the NBC's 'Meet he Press' that the United States was not entering a war with Iran, adamantly defending the president's decision to bomb the country's nuclear sites as a purely tactical move. 'We are not at war with Iran, we are at war with Iran's nuclear program,' the vice president said. When asked by host Kristen Welker if the United States supports Israel killing Iran's leader, Vance responded, 'Well, look, that's up to the Israelis, but our view has been very clear that we don't want a regime change. We do not want to protract this or build this out any more than it's already been built out. We want to end their nuclear program, and then we want to talk to the Iranians about a long-term settlement here.' 'What we said to the Iranians is we do not want war with Iran; we actually want peace. But we want peace in the context of them not having a nuclear weapons program, and that's exactly what the president accomplished last night,' he continued. Similar sentiments were echoed by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio who assured CBS News that the bombings were a 'very precise mission' and 'not an attack on the Iranian people.' ALSO READ: A list of 'safest' countries to seek shelter as World War III fear looms 'This wasn't a regime-change move. This was designed to degrade and/or destroy three nuclear sites related to their nuclear weaponization ambitions, and that was delivered on yesterday,' he said. 'What happens next is up to the regime. The regime wants peace, we're ready for peace. They want to do something else, they're incredibly vulnerable. They can't even protect their own airspace.' When asked whether Iran was headed towards a regime change, Rubio strongly denied it. 'You don't have to like the regime. There are a lot of regimes around the world that we don't like. Okay, but in this particular case, what we are focused on is not the changing of the regime. Okay, that's up to the Iranian people if they want to do that, but that's not what we're focused on. Our national interest is about one thing, and that is Iran not getting anywhere near the capability to weaponize and have nuclear weapons.' ALSO READ: Tulsi Gabbard snubbed by Trump after US spy chief defied her Iran advice? Pics from Situation room sparks buzz In a similar manner, when US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth was quizzed about potential regime change in Iran, he quickly answered, 'This mission was not and has not been about regime change. The President authorized a precision operation to neutralize the threats to our national interests posed by the Iranian nuclear program.' Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi warned on Sunday that the United States would bear 'sole and full responsibility for the dangerous consequences' of its actions, as Iran considers its response. Araghchi accused President Trump of 'betraying' the American people and said the move had crossed 'a significant red line.' Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised Trump's move as a 'bold decision,' noting that the two nations acted in 'full coordination.'
