My thinking, if the US decides credible evidence exists, will strike Iran's nuclear sites again and again.
As Trump said, Iran cannot be allowed to have nuclear bombs.
U.S. strike on Iran: Will there be another surprise attack after nuclear sites survived? The story of the recent U.S. military strike on Iran is far from over. Just few days ago, the United States launched a surprise air and missile attack targeting three of Iran’s most critical nuclear facilities—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. The goal? To stop Iran from advancing its nuclear weapons program.
But now, just days later, U.S. intelligence suggests that the mission did
not fully succeed. According to a report from the
Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the attack only delayed Iran’s nuclear efforts by a few months, not destroyed them. Despite using advanced bunker-buster bombs and precision-guided missiles, the U.S. failed to wipe out Iran’s enriched uranium or its core nuclear infrastructure.
That’s raising serious questions in Washington—and around the world—about what comes next. Could another strike be coming? Is the U.S. preparing for a second military move? And what does this all mean for global security?
What went wrong in the U.S. strike on Iran's nuclear sites?
The story of the U.S. strike was first shared by President Donald Trump himself on Truth Social, where he described it as a “spectacular success.” The operation, called "Midnight Hammer," included 14 GBU-57 bunker-busting bombs, dropped by stealth bombers, along with dozens of Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from U.S. submarines in the Persian Gulf.
However, within days, sources inside the DIA leaked a very different version of events. According to a report first shared by Reuters, satellite images showed key nuclear equipment had already been moved out of the strike zones before the attack. Analysts believe Iran anticipated the possibility of a strike and acted fast to protect its assets.
Also Read: Iran sleeper cell threat hits U.S. soil after base attack? Trump’s sudden G7 exit linked to terror warning, reports say
More troubling, the report says that Iran's underground facilities were deeper than expected, limiting the effectiveness of even the most powerful bunker-buster bombs. As a result, core systems and uranium supplies survived, and Tehran has already begun restarting operations.
Will the U.S. launch a second strike against Iran?
This is the big question. And while no official announcement has been made, multiple defense sources say a second surprise strike is being discussed behind closed doors.
The first attack aimed to eliminate Iran’s nuclear capacity. But with that goal unmet, military planners are now reviewing new options. Increased U.S. drone and satellite surveillance over Iranian territory suggests that Washington is closely monitoring any sign of nuclear reactivation.
Still, launching another strike could be risky. Iran has warned that any further attacks will be met with force. There’s fear that another hit could trigger a wider conflict, including Iranian attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq or on oil shipping lanes in the Strait of Hormuz, which handles about 20% of the world’s oil supply.
How is Iran responding after the failed U.S. operation?
Iran has kept its message consistent. Officials say the attack caused limited damage and that nuclear enrichment will resume soon. They’ve also warned that continued U.S. aggression could push them to exit the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)—a move that would escalate the crisis further.
Despite U.S. claims of success, Iranian state media released footage showing technicians returning to work and power restored to the Natanz facility. According to Associated Press, Iranian trucks were spotted transporting enriched uranium days before the strike, suggesting advance warning and preparation.
What does this mean for U.S. foreign policy?
The story of the U.S. strike on Iran has now turned into a bigger issue for President Trump’s foreign policy team. Internally, there's a divide. Hardliners are urging another strike to finish the job, while others warn that more military action could
spark a regional war.
At the same time, President Trump is facing pressure to show strength during an election year, with critics arguing that the first strike was rushed and under-planned. On the other side, some lawmakers from both parties are asking for a shift back to diplomacy, especially given the global economic risks tied to oil prices and regional instability.
