Trump halts expanded military strikes against Iran's nuclear sites

In June 2025, U.S. military operations targeted Iranian nuclear facilities to hinder its nuclear program. After assessed strikes, Donald Trump received new intelligence indicating that two out of three struck sites sustained minimal damage, raising concerns about their operational status. Despite military advice advocating for an expanded campaign to significantly degrade Iran's nuclear capabilities over several weeks, the president declined to pursue this option. Trump's decision was influenced by his 'America First' policy, which prioritizes avoiding foreign conflicts and minimizing U.S. casualties. His rejection of the plan signaled a divergence between military strategy and his administration's political stance on foreign intervention. The U.S. strikes on the Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordo facilities were initially executed under Operation Midnight Hammer, with the goal of disrupting Iran's nuclear program. On June 22, U.S. B-2 bombers conducted these operations, and Trump claimed substantial damage had been inflicted on the facilities. Later assessments, however, revealed that while one site was largely destroyed, the other two could potentially resume nuclear enrichment in a matter of months. This situation raised alarms among military officials about the effectiveness of the airstrikes and the implications for future engagements with Iran. As discussions unfolded within the government about the necessary actions to mitigate Iran's nuclear threat, the U.S. Central Command drafted a more extensive military strategy labeled an 'all-in' plan. This comprehensive approach would include additional strikes beyond those executed in June. The objective was to significantly weaken Iran’s nuclear program and to target air defense systems in a protracted air campaign. However, Trump deemed it inconsistent with his administration's imperative to bring U.S. forces back from foreign entanglements and reduce military involvement in overseas conflicts. Ultimately, the decision to forgo the all-in military strategy reflected a complex interplay of national security assessments and domestic political pressures. Trump's administration faced scrutiny from lawmakers and allied nations concerned about Iran's lingering nuclear capabilities. The refusal to engage further militarily was not only a tactical choice but also a reflection of broader ideological beliefs about U.S. military engagement abroad, shaping the future of U.S.-Iran relations amidst a climate of heightened tensions.