Israeli military says latest missiles from Iran incoming as explosions heard

The latest US-Iran talks on Tehran's rapidly advancing nuclear programme will not take place, mediator Oman said on Saturday, as Iran launched another missile barrage a day after Israel's blistering attack on Iranian nuclear and military sites.
Both Israel's military and Iran state television announced the latest round of missiles as explosions were heard overhead in parts of Israel, including Tel Aviv.
Israel's military quickly noted that it was currently striking 'military targets' in Tehran.
Jordan said it has closed its airspace.
Israel's ongoing 'widespread strikes' in Tehran and elsewhere have left Iran's surviving leadership with the difficult decision of whether to plunge deeper into conflict with Israel's more powerful forces or seek a diplomatic route.
Oman's foreign minister, Badr al-Busaidi, said on social media the sixth round of indirect nuclear talks on Sunday 'will not now take place', adding that 'diplomacy and dialogue remain the only pathway to lasting peace'.
Although the talks are off for now, 'we remain committed to talks and hope the Iranians will come to the table soon', said a senior US official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss diplomacy.
Israel and Iran signalled more attacks are coming, despite urgent calls from world leaders to deescalate and avoid all-out war.
The attack on nuclear sites set a 'dangerous precedent', China's foreign minister said.
The region is already on edge as Israel makes a new push to eliminate the Iranian-backed militant group Hamas in Gaza after 20 months of fighting.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

USA Today

17 minutes ago

• USA Today

Trump to decide on US role in Israel-Iran conflict within 2 weeks

Trump to decide on US role in Israel-Iran conflict within 2 weeks | The Excerpt On Friday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: President Donald Trump will decide on the U.S. role in the Israel-Iran conflict within two weeks. USA TODAY White House Reporter Davis Winkie discusses how the Trump administration's National Guard immigration enforcement could divide states. Plus, a court lets Trump keep control of California's National Guard for now. The Los Angeles Dodgers say they denied federal agents access to Dodger Stadium parking lots. Trump signs an executive order delaying a ban on TikTok - again. USA TODAY National Correspondent Marco della Cava looks back on the phenomenon that was 'Jaws' on its 50th anniversary. Plus, how locals made up much of the film's cast. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending an email to podcasts@ Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson. And today is Friday, June 20th, 2025. This is USA TODAY's The Excerpt. Today, when might we get a decision on the US approach to Iran and Israel? Plus, how Trump's National Guard immigration enforcement could divide states. And it's been 50 years since the release of Jaws. ♦ President Donald Trump will decide in the next two weeks whether the US will get involved in the conflict between Israel and Iran. That's what the White House said yesterday. Trump continues to keep the world guessing on his plans. He had proposed a diplomatic solution, but has also suggested the US might join the fighting on Israel's side. Iran has said it won't negotiate under duress. The conflict has killed at least 240 Iranians and 24 Israelis in a week. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt declined to say if Trump would seek congressional authorization for strikes on Iran. ♦ The possibility of the Trump administration sending National Guard troops on immigration raids outside their own state could cause a legal clash between states and with the federal government. I spoke with USA TODAY White House reporter Davis Winkie for more. Davis, thanks for joining me today. Davis Winkie: It's good to be back. Taylor Wilson: Davis, starting here, the Pentagon is weighing a request from the Department of Homeland Security to call up members of the National Guard under state authority. What did you find taking a closer look at this memo? Davis Winkie: The way that the administration wants to bring the National Guard into immigration enforcement really diverges from the ways in which the National Guard has previously been used on this front. There have been border efforts that have really sparked professionalization and even reforms of the National Guard when necessary. But each of those missions to include ones under Obama, Biden, and Trump were focused on border security rather than interior immigration enforcement. And that's what stands out, is that now the Trump administration wants 20,000 guardsmen to participate in interior immigration enforcement rather than just border security as they have in the past. Taylor Wilson: Well, putting just slightly a tighter lens here, Davis, what is the 287(g) program and how would it be used here? Davis Winkie: It's named after a section in the federal law that authorizes a lot of immigration enforcement. It's a vehicle by which local and state law enforcement agencies can enter formal partnerships with ICE and DHS. One of the ways in which this can be done is by serving warrants or by doing jailhouse cooperation, where if somebody that a local sheriff's office brings in, for example, has an ICE detainer, then they will coordinate with ICE to give that person over to them when it's appropriate to do so. But the Trump administration has revived a old version of 287(g) called the task force model that actually involves taking law enforcement officers from local and now even state agencies and deputizing them with immigration enforcement powers that lets them go forth and detain people on suspicion of not being lawfully in the United States for example. What it also does is it allows these individuals from participating agencies to go out and about as part of ICE-led task forces or other federal law enforcement task forces that seek to enforce immigration laws. It's basically a way for the immigration enforcement apparatus to widen its reach around the country. Taylor Wilson: Well, I know a big question here is what this means for crossing state lines and the differences from one state to the next. I mean, can task force participants under 287(g) operate across state lines? Davis Winkie: Well, Taylor, that's the big question, and it's one that, according to CNN, officials in the administration and DHS and in the Pentagon are asking. The reason why the administration is likely exploring this possibility is that National Guard troops under state authority are not subject to the restrictions of the Posse Comitatus Act, which is a law that forbids active-duty US military personnel from directly enforcing civilian laws. That's a law that has limited exceptions, but the biggest one is those guard troops on state duty can enforce laws. And by bringing guard troops on state duty onto immigration task forces, you've theoretically then expanded those task forces with a lot more manpower. But the question remains, can those troops go across state lines? The experts that I talked to for this story, Taylor, just don't know. Taylor Wilson: And as you outlined in this piece, Davis, this could potentially mean just broader clashes between red states and blue states. Is that a fair way to look at this? Davis Winkie: I think so. There's been, in recent years, a increasing pattern of clashes between states and the federal government over control and use of the National Guard. The modern examples start with more recently in the first Trump administration when the news of family separations came to light. A lot of democratic governors withdrew their consent for their personnel who were on state duty at the border under a federally-organized task force. So there have been concepts like this before that haven't been doing direct interior immigration enforcement that have had political issues rend the working relationships there. You also saw during the COVID pandemic some red state governors fight against the Biden administration trying to mandate the COVID-19 vaccine for troops in their National Guard. And then what we're seeing right now out in California with the administration federalizing the 4,000 members of the California National Guard against the consent of Governor Gavin Newsom out there. It's a different legal authority than the one that would be in play for the DHS request, but it just goes to show that there are a lot of traditional limits and boundaries with this relationship over the guard between states and the federal government that's taken it from a largely cooperative one in the modern era to one where now you've got people looking to score political points on each other. Taylor Wilson: All right. Another great piece from you, Davis. Folks can find the full version with the link in today's show notes. Davis Winkie covers the White House for USA TODAY. Thank you, Davis. Davis Winkie: Thanks for having me. Taylor Wilson: The US appeals Court let President Trump retain control yesterday of California's National Guard, while the state's Democratic governor proceeds with a lawsuit, challenging Trump's use of the troops amid protests and riots in Los Angeles. ♦ Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Dodgers said yesterday that immigration and customs enforcement agents were denied entry to the stadium grounds. While ICE says the agency was never there. And the Department of Homeland Security claims, the masked agents were with Customs and Border patrol. You can read more about that with a link in today's show notes. ♦ President Trump has again extended the deadline for a TikTok ban to go into effect, allowing the Chinese-owned social media platform to continue operating for the next 90 days. Trump had said earlier in the week that he planned to give TikTok a third extension and signed an executive order yesterday making it official. It was the third time that Trump authorized a delay. The social media app's parent company, ByteDance, now has until September 17th to secure a deal that satisfies a legal requirement. Lawmakers ordered TikTok to divest from its Chinese ownership or face a ban in the United States over national security concerns. Former President Joe Biden signed the bipartisan legislation into law and the Supreme Court held the ban. But since returning to office, Trump has directed the Department of Justice not to enforce it. ♦ It's been 50 years since an iconic movie and theme song kept beachgoers out of the water for a summer and even longer. I spoke with USA TODAY national correspondent Marco della Cava on the anniversary of Jaws. Marco, I always appreciate you stopping by. How are you today? Marco della Cava: I am great. Thanks for having me. Taylor Wilson: Thanks for having on. Really fun story. I cannot believe it's the 50th anniversary of Jaws. So let's just first go back to 1975. How big of a phenomenon was Jaws that summer? Marco della Cava: One way to answer that is one of the gentlemen I interviewed said he finally got to see it in 1979 because he was old enough, four years later, and the line was still around the block in 1979. So you can imagine 1975. Taylor Wilson: Wow. And I know you hear stories about folks not wanting to go into the water for that entire summer. In some cases, years. In some cases, an entire lifetime, right Marco, after seeing this movie. How badly did it scare people? Marco della Cava: Yeah, I mean it terrified folks, young and old. And I was happy to learn interviewing people that I was not alone in not wanting to go in the water and being very scared for years. In fact, I was even scared of going into a pool. And apparently, that phenomenon affected other people as well. As crazy as it sounds, there's no sharks in pools, but any kind of situation where you're in water and you're not sure what's out there, your mind can get ahead of yourself quickly. And Spielberg did an amazing job because as you remember in the opening scene in the first shark attack, you don't see a shark. And that sort of stayed with people, that, here I am bobbing in the water and yet who knows what's beneath me. Taylor Wilson: Well, you mentioned Spielberg. He went on to have this massive career, but this was early on in his career. And you're right that Jaws was both his origin story and almost his career killer. How so? Marco della Cava: Absolutely. He was under pressure to deliver a blockbuster, ideally, under budget. This was a very, very popular novel at the time, and they wanted it out for summer. And he was having massive problems with the mechanical shark. Obviously, he had insisted on shooting it, as you know, in Martha's Vineyard and also with a real mechanical shark out in the ocean. And that caused all sorts of problems that he felt were just going to be his undoing. He felt he might get kicked off the project. And in the end of course it was, as he said in a documentary I watched, the movie that gave him final cut for the rest of his life. So it made him in a huge way. Taylor Wilson: So many of the iconic scenes were filmed off the coast of Massachusetts around the island of Martha's Vineyard, a place I know well and have spent a lot of time. Most Jaws cast members were locals from the island, Marco. Tell us about some of these folks and also their memories from the Jaws production. Marco della Cava: Yeah, that's quite the amazing thing. They came to Martha's Vineyard with, I think, it was eight professional actors. And everyone else was cast locally. And that is what gives the movie its real genuine flavor. And a lot of these folks have since turned up at Jaws festivals that are happening. Different years they've happened, but they're going to happen this summer at the 50th anniversary on Martha's Vineyard. And those who are still alive, who were probably in their 20s, I think the gentleman who plays the college kid at the opening scene, he's often spotted talking to Jaws fans on the island. So that's a big part of the success of the movie, was the fact that it felt real because it really kind of was real in many ways. Taylor Wilson: And Martha's Vineyard local, Jeff Voorhees, played one of the Jaws victims as a kid. He spoke to the Cape Cod Times part of the USA TODAY network. Let's hear what he had to say. Jeff Voorhees: The third victim to get eaten by the shark in that movie back 50 years ago. Day two, we tried. Your leg came out of the water. Day three, your arm came out of the water. And then day five, Spielberg finally goes, "This is taking too long." He goes, "This time we got a different plan." He goes, "We got two guys in wetsuits. They're going to be underwater. When that thing explodes, each going to grab one of your legs, lift you in and out of the water a few times, and then pull you under and give you air." Taylor Wilson: It's the 50th anniversary of this summer. How are fans, how are former, you mentioned part of this, but former cast members and members of this production marking the 50th anniversary? Marco della Cava: In terms of how the cast is marking it, it's a good question. I mean, Richard Dreyfus famously doesn't like talking about Jaws. Spielberg rarely talks about Jaws. It was a long time ago, but I think it's mostly the fans, young and old, and therefore you're going to see Jaws on television quite often over the next few months. There's going to be a re-release of the actual movie, I believe in August. And there are lots of documentaries as well coming out. So anyone who likes the movie is going to be able to learn a lot more about it. Taylor Wilson: And Mark, are you still staying away from the ocean all these years after seeing Jaws? Marco della Cava: I don't stay away from it, but as one of the people I interviewed said, "I don't turn my back to the horizon." Taylor Wilson: Fair enough. Marco della Cava is a national correspondent with USA TODAY joining us here on the 50th anniversary of Jaws. Thanks, Marco. Marco della Cava: Thank you. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Thanks for listening to The Excerpt. We're produced by Shannon Rae Greene and Kelly Monahan, and our executive producer is Laura Beatty. You can get to podcast wherever you get your audio. And if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. As always, you can email us at podcasts@ I'm Taylor Wilson and I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.

Miami Herald

20 minutes ago

• Miami Herald

Brazil joins Latin America's dictatorships in siding with Iran over Israel

No one's shocked to see the dictatorships of Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua lining up behind Iran's repressive theocracy in its standoff with Israel. But Brazil — South America's giant — striking a similar note is sparking outrage in Western diplomatic circles. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's government issued a statement on June 13, hours after the conflict started, expressing its 'firm condemnation' of Israel's attack on Iran's nuclear facilities. But the Brazilian foreign ministry statement didn't condemn Iran's missile attacks on Israel, its repeated vows to 'eliminate' Israel, or its history of supporting terrorist groups. Iran has financially supported Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Gaza-based Hamas organization, which invaded Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, killing more than 1,200 civilians and taking 251 others hostage. Brazil's position on the Israel-Iran conflict stands in stark contrast with that of all major Western democracies. The leaders of the United States, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom and Japan signed a joint pro-Israel statement at the G-7 summit in Alberta, Canada, on June 16. In it, they said that 'Israel has a right to defend itself' and that 'Iran is the principal source of regional instability and terror.' The G-7 statement added that 'we have been consistently clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon.' Shortly before Israel's attack, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had warned that Iran has been secretly enriching uranium to 60% purity — just short of the 90% required for nuclear weapons. If you are not following Iran's political history closely, you may be asking yourself: Why doesn't Iran have the right to produce nuclear weapons as India, Pakistan and several other countries have done? The answer is very simple: because Iran is publicly vowing to annihilate another sovereign country — Israel — that has been recognized by the United Nations since 1948. Few countries would stand idly by if a nearby nation vowed to erase it from the face of the earth and was close to acquiring a nuclear bomb. Over the years, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has repeatedly said that Israel must be 'wiped off the map.' In a 2020 speech, he called Israel a 'cancerous tumor' that 'will undoubtedly be uprooted and destroyed,' according to the Associated Press. It's not just Iran's rhetoric that's frightening, but its actions. In addition to sponsoring terrorist attacks by its proxies against Israel, Iran was behind the Hezbollah 1994 bombing of the AMIA Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina, which left 85 people dead, according to Argentina's government. Elliott Abrams, who served as U.S. special representative for Iran and Venezuela in the first Trump administration, told me that 'it is shocking' to see a major democracy like Brazil lending its diplomatic support to Iran. 'It suggests that Brazilian officials have not read the IAEA report about Iran's violations of international agreements and its efforts to move toward a nuclear weapon,' he said. Abrams said this may be 'an anachronistic effort by Lula to bring back memories of the non-aligned movement. But this is 2025, not 1975'. He added, 'Brazil will not gain anything in the Arab world with this statement. It will make the Ayatollah happy, but what good does that do to Brazil?' Lula, who currently chairs the BRICS group of emerging powers led by Russia, China, India, South Africa and Iran, may be trying to raise his international profile as he prepares to host the bloc's summit in Rio de Janeiro from July 6-7. But many Latin American officials and academics say the Brazilian president may be shooting himself in the foot. Brazil, and Latin America in general, are minor players in world affairs, and Lula's posturing may do his country more harm than good, they say. Andres Velasco, dean of the London School of Economics' School of Public Policy and a former finance minister of Chile, told me that the Brazilian president's flirtations with China, Russia, Iran and the BRICS 'are very bad policy' amid President Trump's global tariff wars. 'I was truly embarrassed to see President Lula recently applauding the parade of missiles on their way to killing Ukrainians at Moscow's Red Square,' Velasco said. Referring to Trump's possible reaction, Velasco added that 'these kinds of things put Latin America in the spotlight at a time when things are so heated that they invite (U.S.) retaliations. The best thing a country like Brazil could do would be to draw as little attention as possible.' Indeed, the support for Iran from Lula and much of Latin America's old-guard left is preposterous. Iran is not only a Jurassic dictatorship that puts women in jail for not covering their heads with a hijab in public and executes people for being gay. It is also a major a global sponsor of terrorism. If Iran is allowed to have a nuclear bomb, it will become much more of a global threat than it already is. Don't miss the 'Oppenheimer Presenta' TV show on Sundays at 9 pm E.T. on CNN en Español. Blog:

Washington Post

35 minutes ago

• Washington Post

Netanyahu chose this war. Israel should finish the job itself.

Eliminating Iran's nuclear program is a goal most of the world should share, and countries in the region and beyond are cheering Israel's campaign to destroy it — many, though not all, in secret. But Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appears to want more than cheering, at least from the United States. America has the Massive Ordnance Penetrator bomb, or MOP, that could burrow deep enough, and with enough firepower, to penetrate Iran's Fordow nuclear facility, as well as the B-2 stealth bombers to deliver it. President Donald Trump has sounded both warlike and diplomatic — issuing a statement of the diplomatic sort on Thursday — but he still appears to be weighing a direct U.S. strike in the coming weeks.