Latest news with #B-2s
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
The political tug-of-war at the center of Trump's Iran decision: From the Politics Desk
Welcome to the online version of From the Politics Desk, an evening newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team's latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail. In today's edition, Andrea Mitchell breaks down the critical decision facing President Donald Trump on the Israel-Iran conflict. Plus, Lawrence Hurley examines the questions that a major Supreme Court ruling on transgender rights left unanswered. Programming note: We're taking a break for Juneteenth tomorrow and will be back in your inbox on Friday, June 20. Sign up to receive this newsletter in your inbox every weekday here. — Adam Wollner As President Donald Trump considers whether the U.S. will strike Iran — likely the most important decision of his second term, one that could remake the landscape of the Middle East — allies and adversaries are taking sides, both at home and abroad. 'I may do it. I may not do it,' Trump told reporters outside the White House earlier today. 'Nobody knows what I'm going to do.' The president openly admired the effectiveness of Israel's initial airstrikes against Iran, even though Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu clearly launched his strikes to interrupt Trump's nuclear diplomacy with Tehran. But after being rebuffed in April when he sought Trump's approval for a joint operation against Iran's nuclear program, Netanyahu could be on the verge of persuading an American president to provide the B-2s to deliver the 30,000-pound 'bunker buster' bombs capable of penetrating the concrete fortress believed to conceal Tehran's most dangerous stockpile of nearly-weapons-grade uranium, based on new Israeli intelligence. Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said on MSNBC today that conflicts with a briefing to Congress this week that the U.S. intelligence has not changed: Iran has not decided to build a nuclear weapon. Israel's argument is that it's now or never. It has decapitated two of Iran's proxies — Hezbollah and Hamas — and toppled the Assad regime in Syria, and its retaliatory strikes last year eliminated many of Iran's air defenses. Israel's air force could damage Iran's above-ground nuclear sites and missile bases if it struck now, before Iran repairs its defenses, but can't eliminate the nuclear threat without U.S. bombs and bombers to reach the most critical underground facility. That has created a political tug-of-war for the heart and mind of Trump, who has publicly yearned for the Nobel Prize, seeing himself as a peacemaker who could bring Iran back into the community of non-terrorist nations and avoid another 'forever war.' Fighting that vision is his competing impulse to join Israel in eliminating the nuclear threat once and for all. And Tehran's leaders clearly misjudged how patient Trump would be with their refusal to compromise in the negotiations. Russian President Vladimir Putin remains on the sidelines, preoccupied with his own war. Jordan's King Abdullah II and French President Emmanuel Macron strongly oppose U.S. involvement. Trump has been consulting Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the Gulf's most influential leader. At home, the MAGA base is divided, with Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., leading the hawks and a growing cohort of Republican isolationists — even in Trump's Cabinet — opposed. Most prominently, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard posted a highly produced anti-war video on her official X account, reportedly infuriating her boss. Critics worry about unintended consequences of military action, repeating former Secretary of State Colin Powell's rueful warning before the U.S. war in Iraq. It's like the Pottery Barn rule: If you break it, you own it. Catch up on our latest reporting on the Israel-Iran conflict: Amid escalating global tensions, Trump struggles to be a 'peacemaker,' by Peter Nicholas, Peter Alexander, Jonathan Allen and Dan De Luce U.S.-backed regime change has a checkered past — Iran may be no different, by Alexander Smith Will Israel's airstrikes cause the collapse of the Iranian regime?, by Dan De Luce and Alexander Smith Tucker Carlson clashes with Sen. Ted Cruz: 'You don't know anything about Iran,' by Megan Lebowitz Follow live updates → The Supreme Court ruling that upheld a Tennessee law banning certain care for transgender youth left various legal questions open, even as other laws aimed at people based on gender identity, including those involving sports and military-service bans, head toward the justices. That means that even though transgender rights activists face a setback, the ruling does not control how other cases will ultimately turn out. 'This decision casts little if any light on how a majority of justices will analyze or rule on other issues,' said Shannon Minter, a lawyer at the National Center for LGBTQ Rights. Most notably, the court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, did not address the key issue of whether such laws should automatically be reviewed by courts with a more skeptical eye, an approach known as 'heightened scrutiny.' Practically, that would mean laws about transgender people would have to clear a higher legal bar to be upheld. The justices skipped answering that question because the court found that Tennessee's law banning gender transition care for minors did not discriminate against transgender people at all. But other cases are likely to raise that issue more directly, meaning close attention will be paid to what the justices said in the various written opinions, as well as what they did not say. Read more from Lawrence → ↔️ Holding the line: The Federal Reserve left interest rates at their current levels as the central bank continued to assess the impact of Trump's tariffs on the U.S. economy. Read more → ⚖️ SCOTUS watch: The Supreme Court rejected a challenge to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's authority to approve a facility in Texas to store spent fuel. Read more → 💉 New sheriff in town: Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has ushered in appointees to a federal vaccine advisory panel who have expressed skepticism about the value and safety of vaccines. Read more → 🤔 Regrets, they have a few: Most of the seven Senate Democrats who voted to confirm Kristi Noem as secretary of the Department of Homeland Security are now critical of her performance, with some saying they'd like a do-over. Read more → 📊 Survey says: Americans are divided on their views of artificial intelligence, with no meaningful differences based on age and partisanship, according to the NBC News Decision Desk Poll. The country's attitudes about AI today mirror poll answers about the rise of the internet in the '90s. 🔵 2026 watch: Bridget Brink, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, announced she is running for Congress as a Democrat for a competitive Michigan House seat that Republicans flipped in 2024. Read more → 🗳️ About last night: Democratic state Sen. Ghazala Hashmi won her party's nomination for lieutenant governor of Virginia in a tight race against a fellow state senator and a former Richmond mayor. Read more → That's all From the Politics Desk for now. Today's newsletter was compiled by Adam Wollner and Dylan Ebs. If you have feedback — likes or dislikes — email us at politicsnewsletter@ And if you're a fan, please share with everyone and anyone. They can sign up here. This article was originally published on
NBC News
3 days ago
- Politics
- NBC News
The political tug-of-war at the center of Trump's Iran decision: From the Politics Desk
Welcome to the online version of From the Politics Desk, an evening newsletter that brings you the NBC News Politics team's latest reporting and analysis from the White House, Capitol Hill and the campaign trail. In today's edition, Andrea Mitchell breaks down the critical decision facing President Donald Trump on the Israel-Iran conflict. Plus, Lawrence Hurley examines the questions that a major Supreme Court ruling on transgender rights left unanswered. Programming note: We're taking a break for Juneteenth tomorrow and will be back in your inbox on Friday, June 20. — Adam Wollner By Andrea Mitchell As President Donald Trump considers whether the U.S. will strike Iran — likely the most important decision of his second term, one that could remake the landscape of the Middle East — allies and adversaries are taking sides, both at home and abroad. 'I may do it. I may not do it,' Trump told reporters outside the White House earlier today. 'Nobody knows what I'm going to do.' The president openly admired the effectiveness of Israel's initial airstrikes against Iran, even though Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu clearly launched his strikes to interrupt Trump's nuclear diplomacy with Tehran. But after being rebuffed in April when he sought Trump's approval for a joint operation against Iran's nuclear program, Netanyahu could be on the verge of persuading an American president to provide the B-2s to deliver the 30,000-pound 'bunker buster' bombs capable of penetrating the concrete fortress believed to conceal Tehran's most dangerous stockpile of nearly-weapons-grade uranium, based on new Israeli intelligence. Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said on MSNBC today that conflicts with a briefing to Congress this week that the U.S. intelligence has not changed: Iran has not decided to build a nuclear weapon. Israel's argument is that it's now or never. It has decapitated two of Iran's proxies — Hezbollah and Hamas — and toppled the Assad regime in Syria, and its retaliatory strikes last year eliminated many of Iran's air defenses. Israel's air force could damage Iran's above-ground nuclear sites and missile bases if it struck now, before Iran repairs its defenses, but can't eliminate the nuclear threat without U.S. bombs and bombers to reach the most critical underground facility. That has created a political tug-of-war for the heart and mind of Trump, who has publicly yearned for the Nobel Prize, seeing himself as a peacemaker who could bring Iran back into the community of non-terrorist nations and avoid another 'forever war.' Fighting that vision is his competing impulse to join Israel in eliminating the nuclear threat once and for all. And Tehran's leaders clearly misjudged how patient Trump would be with their refusal to compromise in the negotiations. Russian President Vladimir Putin remains on the sidelines, preoccupied with his own war. Jordan's King Abdullah II and French President Emmanuel Macron strongly oppose U.S. involvement. Trump has been consulting Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the Gulf's most influential leader. At home, the MAGA base is divided, with Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., leading the hawks and a growing cohort of Republican isolationists — even in Trump's Cabinet — opposed. Most prominently, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard posted a highly produced anti-war video on her official X account, reportedly infuriating her boss. Critics worry about unintended consequences of military action, repeating former Secretary of State Colin Powell's rueful warning before the U.S. war in Iraq. It's like the Pottery Barn rule: If you break it, you own it. U.S.-backed regime change has a checkered past — Iran may be no different, by Alexander Smith Will Israel's airstrikes cause the collapse of the Iranian regime?, by Dan De Luce and Alexander Smith by Megan Lebowitz By Lawrence Hurley The Supreme Court ruling that upheld a Tennessee law banning certain care for transgender youth left various legal questions open, even as other laws aimed at people based on gender identity, including those involving sports and military-service bans, head toward the justices. That means that even though transgender rights activists face a setback, the ruling does not control how other cases will ultimately turn out. 'This decision casts little if any light on how a majority of justices will analyze or rule on other issues,' said Shannon Minter, a lawyer at the National Center for LGBTQ Rights. Most notably, the court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, did not address the key issue of whether such laws should automatically be reviewed by courts with a more skeptical eye, an approach known as 'heightened scrutiny.' Practically, that would mean laws about transgender people would have to clear a higher legal bar to be upheld. The justices skipped answering that question because the court found that Tennessee's law banning gender transition care for minors did not discriminate against transgender people at all. But other cases are likely to raise that issue more directly, meaning close attention will be paid to what the justices said in the various written opinions, as well as what they did not say.
Hindustan Times
4 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Has US moved moved jets, warships to help Israel? What we know
The United States is rapidly shifting military aircraft, warships and personnel across the Middle East to shield Israel from Iranian attacks as President Donald Trump warns Tehran that America's 'patience is wearing thin.' In a series of social media posts, Trump declared that the US had gained 'complete and total control of the skies over Iran,' signalling the possibility of deepening US involvement in the ongoing conflict. According to news agency AP, Washington may directly target Iran's underground nuclear facilities - most notably, the heavily fortified Fordow enrichment plant. Only the US possesses the bunker-busting GBU-57 bomb capable of striking the deep subterranean site, deliverable solely by the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber. While no B-2s are currently deployed to the region, US officials say bombers could fly from Missouri's Whiteman Air Force Base for such a mission, in a 30-hour round-trip operation involving multiple refuelings. The Pentagon has fortified its air presence, quietly deploying additional fighter jets and refueling tankers to undisclosed bases across the Middle East. According to open-source flight tracking data, US refueling aircraft and fighters have also been positioned in key European locations, including the UK, Spain, Germany, and Greece. Though American aircraft have not entered Iranian airspace, they have intercepted incoming Iranian missiles and provided support for Israeli defenses. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth emphasized that current US activity remains defensive: 'We are taking every step to ensure our people are safe.' At sea, US Navy warships, including the USS The Sullivans, USS Thomas Hudner, and USS Arleigh Burke, have shot down Iranian ballistic missiles targeting Israeli cities. The Arleigh Burke has since repositioned, while the USS Carl Vinson strike group remains in the Arabian Sea, poised to protect US troops and regional interests. The USS Nimitz is en route to replace the Vinson, signaling continued US readiness. Destroyers are also stationed in the Red Sea, Western Mediterranean, and Baltic Sea, highlighting the global scope of US naval coordination amid the conflict. Iran and Israel exchanged fresh missile volleys on Wednesday as the air war between the longtime foes entered its sixth day. Iran launched two separate barrages targeting Israeli cities overnight, with explosions heard over Tel Aviv. In retaliation, Israel issued evacuation warnings for parts of Tehran and Karaj, followed by airstrikes that reportedly struck military sites near the Iranian capital. The Israeli military claims to have control over Iranian airspace and has vowed to intensify operations. Iran, meanwhile, has reported at least 224 deaths - most of them civilians. Israel reported 24 civilian casualties.
Sydney Morning Herald
5 days ago
- Politics
- Sydney Morning Herald
Trump's Iran choice: Last-chance diplomacy or a bunker-busting bomb
If Trump holds back, it could well mean that Israel's main objective in the war is never completed. 'Fordo has always been the crux of this thing,' said Brett McGurk, who worked on Middle East issues for four successive U.S. presidents, from George W. Bush to Joe Biden. 'If this ends with Fordo still enriching, then it's not a strategic gain.' That has been true for a long time, and over the past two years the U.S. military has refined the operation, under close White House scrutiny. The exercises led to the conclusion that one bomb would not solve the problem; any attack on Fordo would have to come in waves, with B-2s releasing one bomb after another down the same hole. And the operation would have to be executed by an American pilot and crew. This was all in the world of war planning until the opening salvos Friday morning in Tehran, Iran's capital, when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered the strikes, declaring that Israel had discovered an 'imminent' threat that required 'preemptive action.' New intelligence, he suggested without describing the details, indicated that Iran was on the cusp of turning its fuel stockpile into weapons. U.S. intelligence officials who have followed the Iranian program for years agree that Iranian scientists and nuclear specialists have been working to shorten the time it would take to manufacture a nuclear bomb, but they saw no huge breakthroughs. Yet they agree with McGurk and other experts on one point: If the Fordo facility survives the conflict, Iran will retain the key equipment it needs to stay on a pathway to the bomb, even if it would first have to rebuild much of the nuclear infrastructure that Israel has left in ruins over four days of precision bombing. Loading Netanyahu has pressed for the United States to make its bunker busters available since the Bush administration, so far to no avail. But people who have spoken to Trump in recent months say the topic has come up repeatedly in his conversations with the prime minister. When Trump has been asked about it, he usually avoids a direct answer. Now the pressure is on. Former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who resigned in a split with Netanyahu, told CNN's Bianna Golodryga on Monday that 'the job has to be done, by Israel, by the United States,' an apparent reference to the fact that the bomb would have to be dropped by an American pilot in a US airplane. He said that Trump had 'the option to change the Middle East and influence the world.' And Republican senator Lindsey Graham, who often speaks for the traditional, hawkish members of his party, said on CBS on Sunday that 'if diplomacy is not successful' he will 'urge President Trump to go all in to make sure that, when this operation is over, there's nothing left standing in Iran regarding their nuclear program.' 'If that means providing bombs, provide bombs,' he said, adding, in a clear reference to the Massive Ordinance Penetrator, 'whatever bombs. If it means flying with Israel, fly with Israel.' But Republicans are hardly united in that view. And the split in the party over the decision of whether to make use of one of the Pentagon's most powerful conventional weapons to help one of America's closest allies has highlighted a far deeper divide. It is not only about crippling the centrifuges of Fordo; it is also about MAGA's view of what kinds of wars the United States should avoid at all costs. The anti-interventionist wing of the party, given its most prominent voice by influential podcaster Tucker Carlson, has argued that the lesson of Iraq and Afghanistan is that there is nothing but downside risk in getting deeply into another Middle East war. On Friday, Carlson wrote that the United States should 'drop Israel' and 'let them fight their own wars.' For now, Trump can afford to keep one foot in both camps. By making one more run at coercive diplomacy, he can make the case to the MAGA faithful that he is using the threat of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator to bring the conflict to a peaceful end. And he can tell the Iranians that they are going to cease enriching uranium one way or the other, either by diplomatic agreement or because a GBU-57 imploded the mountain.
The Age
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Age
Trump's Iran choice: Last-chance diplomacy or a bunker-busting bomb
If Trump holds back, it could well mean that Israel's main objective in the war is never completed. 'Fordo has always been the crux of this thing,' said Brett McGurk, who worked on Middle East issues for four successive U.S. presidents, from George W. Bush to Joe Biden. 'If this ends with Fordo still enriching, then it's not a strategic gain.' That has been true for a long time, and over the past two years the U.S. military has refined the operation, under close White House scrutiny. The exercises led to the conclusion that one bomb would not solve the problem; any attack on Fordo would have to come in waves, with B-2s releasing one bomb after another down the same hole. And the operation would have to be executed by an American pilot and crew. This was all in the world of war planning until the opening salvos Friday morning in Tehran, Iran's capital, when Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ordered the strikes, declaring that Israel had discovered an 'imminent' threat that required 'preemptive action.' New intelligence, he suggested without describing the details, indicated that Iran was on the cusp of turning its fuel stockpile into weapons. U.S. intelligence officials who have followed the Iranian program for years agree that Iranian scientists and nuclear specialists have been working to shorten the time it would take to manufacture a nuclear bomb, but they saw no huge breakthroughs. Yet they agree with McGurk and other experts on one point: If the Fordo facility survives the conflict, Iran will retain the key equipment it needs to stay on a pathway to the bomb, even if it would first have to rebuild much of the nuclear infrastructure that Israel has left in ruins over four days of precision bombing. Loading Netanyahu has pressed for the United States to make its bunker busters available since the Bush administration, so far to no avail. But people who have spoken to Trump in recent months say the topic has come up repeatedly in his conversations with the prime minister. When Trump has been asked about it, he usually avoids a direct answer. Now the pressure is on. Former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who resigned in a split with Netanyahu, told CNN's Bianna Golodryga on Monday that 'the job has to be done, by Israel, by the United States,' an apparent reference to the fact that the bomb would have to be dropped by an American pilot in a US airplane. He said that Trump had 'the option to change the Middle East and influence the world.' And Republican senator Lindsey Graham, who often speaks for the traditional, hawkish members of his party, said on CBS on Sunday that 'if diplomacy is not successful' he will 'urge President Trump to go all in to make sure that, when this operation is over, there's nothing left standing in Iran regarding their nuclear program.' 'If that means providing bombs, provide bombs,' he said, adding, in a clear reference to the Massive Ordinance Penetrator, 'whatever bombs. If it means flying with Israel, fly with Israel.' But Republicans are hardly united in that view. And the split in the party over the decision of whether to make use of one of the Pentagon's most powerful conventional weapons to help one of America's closest allies has highlighted a far deeper divide. It is not only about crippling the centrifuges of Fordo; it is also about MAGA's view of what kinds of wars the United States should avoid at all costs. The anti-interventionist wing of the party, given its most prominent voice by influential podcaster Tucker Carlson, has argued that the lesson of Iraq and Afghanistan is that there is nothing but downside risk in getting deeply into another Middle East war. On Friday, Carlson wrote that the United States should 'drop Israel' and 'let them fight their own wars.' For now, Trump can afford to keep one foot in both camps. By making one more run at coercive diplomacy, he can make the case to the MAGA faithful that he is using the threat of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator to bring the conflict to a peaceful end. And he can tell the Iranians that they are going to cease enriching uranium one way or the other, either by diplomatic agreement or because a GBU-57 imploded the mountain.
