U.S. Bombs Iranian Nuclear Sites in Major Escalation
On the night of June 21st, 2025, the United States launched a series of coordinated airstrikes against three of Iran’s most critical nuclear facilities—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. These weren’t limited strikes meant to send a message. They were calculated, high-impact attacks using B-2 Spirit stealth bombers armed with GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrators, also known as “bunker busters”, just as SOFREP had recently predicted.
These bombs are not your run-of-the-mill munitions. They’re designed specifically to crack through hundreds of feet of rock and reinforced concrete, making them the go-to option for taking out deeply buried installations like Fordow, which sits roughly 300 feet beneath a mountain near Qom.
President Trump announced shortly afterward that a full payload had been dropped on Fordow and that all U.S. aircraft exited Iranian airspace safely. According to him, the goal was straightforward: eliminate the nuclear threat posed by Iran by physically dismantling the regime’s ability to enrich uranium. Trump labeled the operation a “spectacular military success,” asserting that the targeted enrichment facilities had been completely destroyed. Whether that claim holds up under independent scrutiny remains to be seen.
Iran, for its part, pushed back on the narrative. Officials in Tehran claimed they had anticipated the strikes and evacuated personnel from Fordow in advance, thereby limiting any lasting damage. The country’s Atomic Energy Organization also reported that there were no radiation leaks or contamination following the attacks. That claim was supported by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which confirmed it had detected no elevated radiation levels in the vicinity of the targeted sites. Still, Iran’s foreign minister called the strikes “unacceptable” and warned that the Islamic Republic “reserves all options” when it comes to retaliation.
The broader implications of this operation are already sending shockwaves through the region. Analysts warn that Iran could respond by closing the Strait of Hormuz—a move that would instantly disrupt global oil flows—or by launching proxy attacks against U.S. and allied interests throughout the Middle East. The strategic use of the GBU-57A/B, a weapon only the United States possesses, added weight to the action and signaled just how far Washington is willing to go. For many observers, this marks a turning point in the long-simmering standoff between the U.S. and Iran.
The timing of the strikes is also notable. They came on the heels of a week of Israeli attacks on Iranian targets, suggesting a broader campaign is underway. It appears that after years of diplomacy and red lines being crossed, the Trump administration finally decided the time for negotiations was over. This wasn’t a warning shot—it was a direct attempt to neutralize a strategic threat. Whether it accomplishes that goal or simply ushers in a new phase of instability in the Middle East is still an open question.
What is clear is that this operation represents one of the most consequential decisions of Trump’s presidency. This isn’t only about bunker busters and stealth bombers—it’s about drawing a line in the sand, with all the risk that entails. The coming days and weeks will reveal whether this was a surgical success or the opening act of a much larger conflict.
U.S. Bombs Iranian Nuclear Sites in Major Escalation
On the night of June 21st, 2025, the United States launched a series of coordinated airstrikes against three of Iran’s most critical nuclear facilities—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. These weren’t limited strikes meant to send a message. They were calculated, high-impact attacks using B-2 Spirit stealth bombers armed with GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrators, also known as “bunker busters”, just as SOFREP had recently predicted.
These bombs are not your run-of-the-mill munitions. They’re designed specifically to crack through hundreds of feet of rock and reinforced concrete, making them the go-to option for taking out deeply buried installations like Fordow, which sits roughly 300 feet beneath a mountain near Qom.
President Trump announced shortly afterward that a full payload had been dropped on Fordow and that all U.S. aircraft exited Iranian airspace safely. According to him, the goal was straightforward: eliminate the nuclear threat posed by Iran by physically dismantling the regime’s ability to enrich uranium. Trump labeled the operation a “spectacular military success,” asserting that the targeted enrichment facilities had been completely destroyed. Whether that claim holds up under independent scrutiny remains to be seen.
Iran, for its part, pushed back on the narrative. Officials in Tehran claimed they had anticipated the strikes and evacuated personnel from Fordow in advance, thereby limiting any lasting damage. The country’s Atomic Energy Organization also reported that there were no radiation leaks or contamination following the attacks. That claim was supported by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which confirmed it had detected no elevated radiation levels in the vicinity of the targeted sites. Still, Iran’s foreign minister called the strikes “unacceptable” and warned that the Islamic Republic “reserves all options” when it comes to retaliation.
The broader implications of this operation are already sending shockwaves through the region. Analysts warn that Iran could respond by closing the Strait of Hormuz—a move that would instantly disrupt global oil flows—or by launching proxy attacks against U.S. and allied interests throughout the Middle East. The strategic use of the GBU-57A/B, a weapon only the United States possesses, added weight to the action and signaled just how far Washington is willing to go. For many observers, this marks a turning point in the long-simmering standoff between the U.S. and Iran.
The timing of the strikes is also notable. They came on the heels of a week of Israeli attacks on Iranian targets, suggesting a broader campaign is underway. It appears that after years of diplomacy and red lines being crossed, the Trump administration finally decided the time for negotiations was over. This wasn’t a warning shot—it was a direct attempt to neutralize a strategic threat. Whether it accomplishes that goal or simply ushers in a new phase of instability in the Middle East is still an open question.
What is clear is that this operation represents one of the most consequential decisions of Trump’s presidency. This isn’t only about bunker busters and stealth bombers—it’s about drawing a line in the sand, with all the risk that entails. The coming days and weeks will reveal whether this was a surgical success or the opening act of a much larger conflict.
Iran’s Response to the Bombings
Iran has responded to the recent U.S. bombing of its nuclear facilities with a mix of sharp condemnation, military retaliation, and diplomatic maneuvering. Tehran isn’t taking the strikes lightly. Iranian officials, led by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, have labeled the attacks a flagrant breach of international law and the U.N. Charter. Araghchi called it a crossing of a “significant red line” and said that Iran has no choice but to respond under what it sees as its legitimate right to self-defense. From their perspective, this wasn’t just an act of war—it was an invitation to a wider conflict.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry accused the United States of starting a “dangerous war” at a time when diplomatic efforts were supposedly still on the table. They’ve called for an emergency session of the U.N. Security Council to formally condemn the strikes and hold the U.S. accountable. Iran wants to make it clear that, in its view, Washington is the aggressor here—and it’s using every international channel available to push that narrative.
On the military front, Iran didn’t waste time. Almost immediately after the U.S. strikes, they launched their 20th wave of missile and drone attacks on Israeli military sites. This was more than symbolic. It was a message: Iran is still in the fight and has no intention of backing down.
Officials have warned of “everlasting consequences” for the United States and haven’t ruled out targeting global chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz, a move that would have serious ripple effects on international oil markets.
At home, the Iranian government is doing what governments often do in a crisis—playing down the damage. State-run media reported that the Fordow facility was largely unharmed, claiming that only the entrance and exit tunnels were hit. No fatalities were reported. It’s a calculated bit of damage control meant to keep morale up and avoid giving the U.S. or Israel any perception of a clear win.
Behind the scenes, Iran is working the phones. Araghchi has been in contact with several regional governments, trying to rally support and drum up opposition to the American strikes. The goal is to frame this as a reckless escalation by the U.S. and Israel and to isolate them diplomatically. Tehran is looking to turn this incident into a rallying cry for international condemnation and shore up its own alliances in the process.
In short, Iran is striking a defiant tone. It’s not backing down, not admitting major losses, and certainly not ruling out more retaliation. At the same time, it’s pressing every legal and diplomatic button it can find to make the U.S. pay a political price on the world stage. The airstrikes may have taken aim at Iran’s nuclear program, but the fallout is already shaping up to hit a lot more than just concrete and steel. This isn’t over—not by a long shot.
Israel and Iran Continue to Exchange Missiles
Iran and Israel are now locked in a fast-moving and violent exchange of missile attacks, the likes of which haven’t been seen in years. This latest escalation didn’t come out of nowhere—it was triggered by the U.S. bombing run that targeted Iran’s underground nuclear facilities in Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordow. President Trump proudly declared those sites “obliterated,” and Iran, not surprisingly, vowed revenge. What followed was a brutal back-and-forth that has turned city skylines into warzones and thrown millions of civilians into bunkers.
On Sunday, Iran fired off two back-to-back salvos of missiles—27 in each wave—aimed directly at high-value targets inside Israel, including Ben Gurion Airport outside Tel Aviv, military command centers, and sensitive research sites. These weren’t warning shots. Air raid sirens screamed across Israeli cities, and scenes of chaos unfolded as civilians scrambled for cover. Tel Aviv and Haifa took some of the worst hits, with emergency crews reporting at least 20 people injured. The fact that the two missile barrages came just thirty minutes apart shows that Iran isn’t just retaliating—it’s accelerating.
Israel, true to form, hit back immediately. The IDF launched a string of airstrikes into western Iran, specifically targeting the launch sites that had just been used against them. According to Israeli military officials, several of those launchers were destroyed, and some of the personnel behind the attacks were taken out. They’re claiming these hits have forced Iran to rethink how and where it fires its next shots, which may or may not slow the momentum—but it hasn’t stopped it.
Both sides are using more than just missiles. Drones have been added to the mix, complicating defense efforts and making the battle more unpredictable. Civilian areas haven’t been spared, and urban damage in cities like Tel Aviv makes it clear that this isn’t some contained skirmish. It’s a real, destructive conflict that’s tearing up infrastructure and terrifying populations.
The deeper concern now is what happens next. Iran has already stated that, from its point of view, every U.S. asset in the region is a fair target. That puts American bases, personnel, and possibly even commercial interests in the crosshairs. With U.S. B-2 bombers and bunker-busting ordnance playing a central role in how this whole thing started, Washington is already in it—whether it wants to be or not.
This isn’t just another chapter in the long-running Iran-Israel feud. It’s a new and more dangerous phase, fueled by open warfare and high-tech weaponry on both sides. The region is on edge, and with both Tehran and Jerusalem signaling they’re ready to go even further, this thing could get worse before it gets any better.
Keep checking back with SOFREP for expert analysis of the ongoing situation.
COMMENTS
There are
You must become a subscriber or login to view or post comments on this article.