Donald Trump's address to the nation after US 'completely and totally obliterated' Iran's nuclear facilities

President Trump addressed the nation on Saturday night after a military strike on Iran that he said 'completely and totally obliterated' the country's three major nuclear enrichment facilities.
The full remarks from the president are below:
Thank you very much.
A short time ago, the U.S. military carried out massive, precision strikes on the three key nuclear facilities in the Iranian regime. Fordo, Natanz and Esfahan. Everybody heard those names for years as they built this horribly destructive enterprise.
Our objective was the destruction of Iran's nuclear enrichment capacity and a stop to the nuclear threat posed by the world's number one state sponsor of terror.
Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated. Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not. Future attacks would be far greater and a lot easier.
For 40 years, Iran has been saying. Death to America, death to Israel. They have been killing our people, blowing off their arms, blowing off their legs, with roadside bombs. That was their specialty. We lost over 1,000 people and hundreds of thousands throughout the Middle East, and around the world have died as a direct result of their hate in particular. So many were killed by their general, Qassim Soleimani. I decided a long time ago that I would not let this happen. It will not continue.
I want to thank and congratulate Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu. We worked as a team like perhaps no team has ever worked before, and we've gone a long way to erasing this horrible threat to Israel. I want to thank the Israeli military for the wonderful job they've done. And most importantly, I want to congratulate the great American patriots who flew those magnificent machines tonight, and all of the United States military on an operation the likes of which the world has not seen in many, many decades.
Hopefully, we will no longer need their services in this capacity. I hope that's so. I also want to congratulate the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan 'Razin' Caine, spectacular general, and all of the brilliant military minds involved in this attack.
With all of that being said, this cannot continue. There will be either peace, or there will be tragedy for Iran, far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days. 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. There's no military in the world that could have done what we did tonight. Not even close. There has never been a military that could do what took place just a little while ago.
Tomorrow, General Caine, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth will have a press conference at 8 a.m. at the Pentagon. And I want to just thank everybody. And, in particular, God. I want to just say, we love you, God, and we love our great military. Protect them. God bless the Middle East. God bless Israel and God bless America. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Reuters

27 minutes ago

• Reuters

Strikes on Iran mark Trump's biggest, and riskiest, foreign policy gamble

WASHINGTON, June 22 (Reuters) - With his unprecedented decision to bomb Iran's nuclear sites, directly joining Israel's air attack on its regional arch-foe, U.S. President Donald Trump has done something he had long vowed to avoid - intervene militarily in a major foreign war. The dramatic U.S. strike, including the targeting of Iran's most heavily fortified nuclear installation deep underground, marks the biggest foreign policy gamble of Trump's two presidencies and one fraught with risks and unknowns. Trump, who insisted on Saturday that Iran must now make peace or face further attacks, could provoke Tehran into retaliating by closing the Strait of Hormuz, the world's most important oil artery, attacking U.S. military bases and allies in the Middle East, stepping up its missile barrage on Israel and activating proxy groups against American and Israeli interests worldwide, analysts said. Such moves could escalate into a broader, more protracted conflict than Trump had envisioned, evoking echoes of the 'forever wars' that America fought in Iraq and Afghanistan, which he had derided as 'stupid' and promised never to be dragged into. 'The Iranians are seriously weakened and degraded in their military capabilities,' said Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East negotiator for Democratic and Republican administrations. 'But they have all sorts of asymmetric ways that they can respond... This is not going to end quick.' In the lead-up to the bombing that he announced late on Saturday, Trump had vacillated between threats of military action and appeals for renewed negotiation to persuade Iran to reach a deal to dismantle its nuclear program. A senior White House official said that once Trump was convinced that Tehran had no interest in reaching a nuclear agreement, he decided the strikes were 'the right thing to do.' Trump gave the go-ahead once he was assured of a 'high probability of success,' the official said – a determination reached after more than a week of Israeli air attacks on Iran's nuclear and military facilities paved the way for the U.S. to deliver the potentially crowning blow. Trump touted the "great success" of the strikes, which he said included the use of massive "bunker-buster bombs" on the main site at Fordow. But some experts suggested that while Iran's nuclear program may have been set back for many years, the threat may be far from over. Iran denies seeking a nuclear weapon, saying its program is for purely peaceful purposes. 'In the long term, military action is likely to push Iran to determine nuclear weapons are necessary for deterrence and that Washington is not interested in diplomacy,' the Arms Control Association, a non-partisan U.S.-based organization that advocates for arms control legislation, said in a statement. 'Military strikes alone cannot destroy Iran's extensive nuclear knowledge. The strikes will set Iran's program back, but at the cost of strengthening Tehran's resolve to reconstitute its sensitive nuclear activities,' the group said. Eric Lob, assistant professor in the Department of Politics and International Relations at Florida International University, said Iran's next move remains an open question and suggested that among its forms of retaliation could be to hit 'soft targets' of the U.S. and Israel inside and outside the region. But he also said there was a possibility that Iran could return to the negotiating table – 'though they would be doing so in an even weaker position' – or seek a diplomatic off-ramp. In the immediate aftermath of the U.S. strikes, however, Iran showed little appetite for concessions. Iran's Atomic Energy Organization said it would not allow development of its 'national industry' to be stopped, and an Iranian state television commentator said every U.S. citizen or military member in the region would not be legitimate targets. Karim Sadjadpour, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, posted on X: 'Trump indicated this is now the time for peace. It's unclear and unlikely the Iranians will see it the same way. This is more likely to open a new chapter of the 46-year-old US-Iran war than conclude it.' 'REGIME CHANGE' Some analysts suggested that Trump, whose administration has previously disavowed any aim of dislodging the Iranian leadership, could be drawn into seeking 'regime change' if Tehran carries out major reprisals or moves to build a nuclear weapon. That, in turn, would bring additional risks. 'Beware mission creep, aiming for regime change and democratization campaigns,' said Laura Blumenfeld, a Middle East analyst at the Johns Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies in Washington. 'You'll find the bones of many failed U.S. moral missions buried in Middle East sands.' Jonathan Panikoff, a former U.S. deputy intelligence officer for the Middle East, said Iran's leadership would quickly engage in 'disproportionate attacks' if it felt its survival was imperiled. But Tehran will also have to be mindful of the consequences, he said. While actions such as closing the Strait of Hormuz would pose problems for Trump with the resulting higher oil prices and potential U.S. inflationary impact, it would also hurt China, one of Iran's few powerful allies. At the same time, Trump is already facing strong push-back from congressional Democrats against the Iran attack and will also have to contend with opposition from the anti-interventionist wing of his Republican MAGA base. Trump, who faced no major international crisis in his first term, is now embroiled in one just six months into his second. Even if he hopes U.S. military involvement can be limited in time and scope, the history of such conflicts often carries unintended consequences for American presidents. Trump's slogan of 'peace through strength' will certainly be tested as never before, especially with his opening of a new military front after failing to meet his campaign promises to quickly end wars in Ukraine and Gaza. 'Trump is back in the war business,' said Richard Gowan, U.N. director at the International Crisis Group. 'I am not sure anyone in Moscow, Tehran or Beijing ever believed his spiel that he is a peacemaker. It always looked more like a campaign phrase than a strategy."

Spectator

33 minutes ago

• Spectator

Trump's Iran strike is a victory for the free world

Tel Aviv To America and Israel, the free world owes a debt – for courage, for clarity, for doing what had to be done. When the moment came, they did not hesitate. They bore the weight, braved the cost, and moved with the strength history demands. When Israel first struck inside Iran nine days ago, its government made a fateful decision: to sound the sirens and send its people into bomb shelters across the country. It was a moment of collective alertness, a signal that the threat was near and real. Last night, there were no sirens. No mass alerts. Most of Israel slept soundly as the United States acted with precision, strength, and resolve to bomb Iran's nuclear sites. That difference – between fear and confidence, between warning and control – speaks volumes about what has changed. This was perhaps the most complex and devastating non-nuclear strike in modern history This was a historic moment, and not because it came out of nowhere. Quite the opposite. This was the logical and necessary conclusion of a path the Islamic Republic of Iran refused to abandon. The United States and Israel did not want this war. They offered negotiations. They extended time. They warned. They gave the regime in Tehran every opportunity to reverse course, to step back from its genocidal ambitions, its nuclear obsession, and its campaign of regional subversion. But Iran did not flinch. It lied, stalled, cheated, plotted, and prepared. It never paused its pursuit of the bomb or its dream of erasing Israel. And so, at the hour of consequence, America acted. Twelve GBU-57 'bunker-buster' bombs, delivered by American B-2 Spirit bombers, struck Iran's fortified nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. Fordow – long regarded as the crown jewel of the regime's clandestine enrichment programme – was among the primary targets. Dozens of Tomahawk missiles were launched at Natanz and Fordow from submarines. This was not symbolic. It was strategic, surgical, and overwhelming. According to President Trump, the sites were 'completely and totally obliterated.' Iran's nuclear infrastructure has suffered a decisive and unprecedented blow. President Trump, in a nationally televised address, declared the operation a 'spectacular military success.' And he was right. But what is most telling is what he said next: that the Iranian regime must now make peace, or face far greater destruction. 'Tonight's was the most difficult of them all,' he warned, 'and perhaps the most lethal. But if peace does not come quickly, we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill.' No bravado. Just clarity. Just strength. Peace is not the fruit of balance, but of victory. From Carthage to Berlin, it is the victor who dictates the terms, who defines the future, who writes the rules. So it must be again. This clarity is what Britain and much of the West have lacked. While Israel acted, Britain and countless others criticised, threatened, and tried every diplomatic lever to tie Israel's hands and halt its response. They failed. Where others equivocated, Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu planned, prepared, and executed. For over a year and a half, Israel has dismantled Iran's network of proxies – Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis – with discipline and endurance. Each strike, each operation, was a message: step back. Iran refused. Now the regime is left with rubble, not leverage. Some voices will say this is escalation. One of them, predictably, was António Guterres. The UN Secretary-General, whose career has been defined by impotence in the face of aggression, condemned the strikes and warned of catastrophe. The United Nations, once conceived as a guardian of peace, has become an echo chamber of moral equivocation, paralysed by autocrats and irrelevant in moments of actual consequence. While Iran built centrifuges, armed proxies, and threatened genocide, the UN debated terminology. Now, when action has finally been taken, it issues pleas for de-escalation, because that is all it has left. But the catastrophe began long ago – with the regime's drive to build a bomb, to wage war through terror, to dominate its region by force and fanaticism. What the world witnessed last night was not provocation. It was justice delayed, finally delivered. This action was not impulsive. A year ago, ABC News now confirms, the United States and Israel practised this strike in joint military exercises. Trump's much-maligned two-week 'pause' was not weakness. It was discipline. It was preparation. It was statesmanship. While the world speculated, while critics sneered with slogans like 'Trump Always Chickens Out,' the President and his team were aligning assets, coordinating allies, and positioning for impact. What followed was perhaps the most complex and devastating non-nuclear strike in modern history. And still the Iranian regime insists it will not relent. Its Atomic Energy Organisation struck a defiant tone, denying the extent of damage and accusing the United States of violating international law. But facts are stubborn things. The sites are gone. The enrichment has stopped. And the world, quietly or openly, knows who preserved peace. Leading Republicans, even those who have broken with Trump in the past, voiced their support. Mike Pence, his former Vice President, said Trump 'should be commended for his decisive leadership.' Mitch McConnell, ever measured, said the President made the right call. That unity matters. Because this was not an act for one country. It was for all free nations. Israel now has operational dominance over Iranian skies. Intelligence cooperation has reached new levels. Thousands of Iranian operatives, long working quietly for the West, have proved decisive. And Israel will continue its campaign, as its own media made clear: 'Israel will continue to attack Iran.' This is how you fight tyranny. This is how you dismantle terror. Not with platitudes, but with power. Not with moral fog, but with moral clarity. The remaking of the Middle East began on 7 October, when Israel awoke to unimaginable horror. It has continued ever since – with resilience, resolve, and ruthless strategic logic. Last night, that logic reached its inevitable conclusion. The question for the rest of the world is simple: which side are you on?

Daily Mail​

37 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

Map shows full list of countries that want Israel wiped off face of the Earth or refuse to acknowledge it exist. No wonder Israelis have a siege mentality: PETER VAN ONSELEN

There are few nations on Earth whose very existence is up for debate. Fewer still where that debate is held not only in the United Nations General Assembly but on the streets of Sydney, London and New York. Yet that's the uncomfortable reality Israel has lived with every day of its modern existence. A state carved born from the ashes of the Holocaust and immediately met with war. Now, nearly 80 years on, Israel is still surrounded: geographically, diplomatically and ideologically by forces that don't just criticise its policies but question whether it should exist at all. And yet some people can't even fathom why Israelis feel under siege. You can't defend every Israeli decision. I don't. The country's response to Hamas sometimes shocks and appalls, and its handling of relations with Iran and the Palestinians can at times be counterproductive. But for those with short memories or selective sympathies, Israel's actions take place in a context that is unique in modern geopolitics: it's a state surrounded by enemies, some of whom don't just hate it but want it wiped off the map entirely. The states that want Israel gone Let's start with Iran given the current conflict. The Islamic Republic isn't remotely shy about its intentions. For decades, Iranian leaders have referred to Israel as a 'cancerous tumour' and 'the little Satan'. Iran has repeatedly pledged to wipe it from the face of the planet. Which is precisely why Israel is determined to prevent Iran developing nuclear weapons. It's not just puffed up rhetoric either. Iran funds and arms proxies located right on Israel's borders, including Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza. Iran's nuclear ambitions, thinly disguised behind claims of civilian purposes, are rightly feared. Syria, despite the implosion of its own state, remains formally at war with Israel. It has offered safe passage and logistical support to anti-Israel groups. It has allowed Iranian military infrastructure to be set up on its territory. Every Israeli airstrike on Syrian soil counts as a pre-emptive act of self-preservation. While some Arab states have quietly stepped back from overt hostility thanks in part to the Abraham Accords, others remain diplomatically frozen. Saudi Arabia has toyed with recognition but still hasn't made the leap. Algeria, Iraq and Yemen remain openly hostile - with the Houthis in Yemen regularly firing rockets. These are not minor players in the Middle East. They are regional powers with long-standing ideological or religious opposition to Israel's existence. Terrorist groups committing genocide Right behind the hostile states are the armed terrorist groups that operate with their blessing. Groups whose founding charters demand the destruction of Israel. This isn't speculative or exaggerated, it's all there in black and white. Take Hezbollah for example, the Iranian-backed militia in Lebanon. Its 1985 open letter to the world doesn't mince words and has never been retracted: 'Our struggle will end only when this entity [Israel] is obliterated.' It has thousands of rockets aimed at Israeli cities and has provoked multiple wars. And then there is Hamas, which has long governed Gaza and fired thousands of rockets into Israel during the past few years, including before the slaughter on October 7, 2023. Hamas' charter literally calls for the destruction of Israel. It doesn't talk about peace or a two-state solution. Rather, it calls for Islamic rule 'from the river to the sea' - a euphemism for the end of the Israel state. Then there's Palestinian Islamic Jihad, smaller than Hamas but no less lethal or ideologically opposed to Israel's very existence. PIJ is bankrolled by Iran, is responsible for suicide bombings and rocket attacks and is committed to armed resistance as the only pathway forward. Coexistence is not on its agenda, yet in some quarters of the Western world these groups are not even regarded as terrorist organisations. They are referred to as 'freedom fighters', a form of Orwellian rebranding that should concern us all. Countries that still say 'no' to Israel's right to exist As of today there are more than two dozen countries that still refuse to recognise Israel as a legitimate nation. Not rogue states or banana republics but members of the UN. They include Pakistan, Indonesia and Malaysia, as well as states already mentioned. They have no formal diplomatic relations with Israel: No embassies in Israel, no Israeli embassies in their home states, nor any acknowledgement of its existence. A significant portion of the Muslim world, with hundreds of millions of citizens, therefore regards the tiny Jewish state as illegitimate. Not just in policy terms but in principle, and that's before you factor in the noisy rejections of Israel by the likes of North Korea and Venezuela. To be sure, the Abraham Accords - an agreement between Israel and Arab states struck under the first administration helped overcome some of the anti-Israeli sentiments around the world. The UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan all moved towards formal recognition. But the list of holdouts remains long and politically influential. It's also worth noting that some of the so-called moderate states have no love for Israel either. They might shake hands in Washington, but their schoolbooks, media and official rhetoric still often demonises Israel and legitimises the actions of its enemies. The campaign to delegitimise Israel Perhaps the most galling players in attempts to delegitimise the state of Israel can be seen in some Western universities, NGOs and parliaments: Lopsided outrage that erupts whenever Israel defends itself, but not so much when rockets fall on Tel Aviv or families are slaughtered by jihadists. The nuance to understand Israeli reactions is lost in the very institutions that are supposed to use nuance as a cornerstone of their approaches and thinking. The Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement claims to target Israeli policies, but in reality it aims to isolate and weaken the state entirely. Some of its founders are open about their end goal: not a two-state solution, but no Jewish state at all. And yet BDS continues to be embraced in Western cultural and academic circles writ large, particularly among those for whom context and consistency are optional extras. Then there's the protest movements. In the wake of Hamas's barbaric October 7 attack, which saw over 1,200 Israelis killed and hundreds taken hostage, university students across the West held rallies against Israel. Think about that for a moment. Civilians were butchered, babies beheaded and women raped, yet the global response in some quarters was not horror at the atrocities but outrage that Israel dared to respond. No other nation on earth would tolerate that kind of hypocrisy and nor should Israel. An understandable siege mentality So yes Israel has a siege mentality. But that's not paranoia, it's realism. Israel is a country surrounded by its enemies, some of them with large armies, others with well-funded terror networks, and still more with ideological purity that rejects Israel's very right to exist. Some with nuclear weapons, others trying to develop them. How would you feel if you lived in Israel? It's also a country that has each and every military response it makes dissected in the global media. Meanwhile its attackers are too often granted the soft bigotry of low expectations. When Israel makes a mistake, it's a war crime. When Hamas targets a bus stop, it's 'resistance'. Criticising Israeli policy is fair game. After all, unlike almost every single one of its enemies, Israel is a democracy, where leaders face elections and journalists hold them to account. But questioning Israel's right to exist, or pretending its strategic environment is anything other than hostile, is an abdication of intellectual honesty. And so is reflecting negatively on Israel's responses without the context it exists within. Sympathy without context is misguided sentiment There's no doubt the Israel Palestine conflict is messy, painful and very tragic. Innocents suffer, lives are lost and peace feels further away with every passing year. But if you claim to care about peace or justice you cannot ignore the basic fact that one side is trying to survive in a region where its very existence is considered provocative. Israel certainly isn't perfect. No country is, including democracies. But it is a democracy surrounded by autocracies. It is a nation born out of trauma, rejected by many the moment it arrived. Ever since it has been forced to fight for the simple right to live. Those who rush to condemn Israel while ignoring the threats it faces every single day reveal more about their prejudices than their principles. Israel feels besieged because it is, and no amount of slogans or campus activism changes that.