Until Saturday night, the world waited to see whether President Donald Trump would join Israel’s campaign against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. Now we have the answer.
In a televised address from the White House, President Trump called the strikes a ‘spectacular military success’ and a ‘historic moment for the United States, Israel, and the world.’ He confirmed that Fordow—Iran’s deeply buried nuclear enrichment site near Qom—was among the targets, and warned, ‘There are many targets left.’ His message was clear: Iran must ‘make peace or face tragedy far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days.’
The U.S. has struck decisively. Whether the strike succeeds in halting Iran’s nuclear program—as the president boldly claims—remains to be seen. What is clear is that the geopolitical fuse is lit, and the consequences are just beginning.
So far, the administration has not provided public evidence that Iran was mere ‘weeks away’ from building a nuclear bomb, as the White House press secretary alleged. That claim may have helped justify the strike, but it rests more on assumption than on firm intelligence.
Yes, Iran has enriched uranium to near weapons-grade levels—but that alone does not make a bomb. Tehran still needs to master warhead design, detonator synchronization, reentry shielding, and delivery systems. There is no verified proof it has done so.
As I wrote for Fox News last week, bombs can destroy facilities—but they cannot erase knowledge. Many of Iran’s scientists are still alive, and their motivation may now be stronger than ever.
Tehran now faces a choice: capitulate or retaliate. Based on history, ideology, and culture, the odds overwhelmingly favor retaliation.
Surrender is antithetical to Iran’s revolutionary mindset. The Islamic Republic has endured war, sanctions, and sabotage. Its leadership interprets resistance as divine duty. This strike may have weakened Iran’s enrichment infrastructure, but it will likely strengthen the regime’s resolve.
Iran retains extensive capabilities: ballistic missiles, global proxy networks, cyber weapons, and elite paramilitary forces. This is not the end—it is the beginning of a new phase.
Regional attacks on U.S. assets: Iran will likely target American military bases and diplomatic posts in Iraq, Syria, and the Gulf states through proxy militias like Kataib Hezbollah or the Houthis. Any U.S. casualties could force a wider war. Disruption of oil routes: Iran could attempt to block or threaten the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint for nearly 20% of the world’s oil. Even a short disruption could send global energy prices soaring. Strikes on U.S. allies: Expect missile attacks or proxy assaults on Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and especially Israel. Iran’s allies in Lebanon, Syria, and Gaza are likely already preparing. Asymmetric attacks abroad: Iran’s global network of operatives includes sleeper cells in Latin America, Europe, and possibly the U.S. If Tehran believes it has little to lose, civilian targets and cyber infrastructure may be in its crosshairs.If President Trump acted without solid intelligence, the risk is real: that we have provoked a long war on shaky grounds. Unlike the Iraq invasion in 2003, Iran’s enrichment program is genuine—but neutralizing it with airstrikes alone will not work. This war, if it escalates, will not be fought on our terms.
What is more, the strike could backfire politically inside Iran. Rather than destabilizing the regime, it may unify it. Public humiliation of key sites like Fordow plays directly into the regime’s ‘Great Satan’ narrative, fueling nationalism and quelling dissent.
The U.S. and its allies must now pivot quickly to containment, deterrence, and resilience. Air defenses must be reinforced. Cyber infrastructure must be secured. Intelligence agencies must track Iranian networks abroad. And most importantly, diplomatic channels must remain open—to allies and, when possible, to adversaries.
This is not the time for complacency. It is a time for clear strategy, disciplined leadership, and vigilance.
The deed is done. Iran’s nuclear sites lie in ruins—but its will to retaliate is not. President Trump’s triumphant tone— ‘Fordow is gone,’ he declared—may play well politically, but it also risks underestimating a hardened adversary.
Iran has absorbed assassinations, sanctions, and cyberattacks. It has endured war and isolation. What it has not done—what it is unlikely to do now—is give up.
The American people must be prepared—not just for victory narratives, but for volatility. The battlefield ahead is asymmetric, unpredictable, and global. It will test not only our military but our wisdom.
The question now is no longer whether we acted. The question is: Was it worth the cost?
