Trump’s Iran Strike Claims Challenged by Leaked DIA Report on Nuclear Sites

President Donald Trump’s bold claim that U.S. airstrikes “completely and totally obliterated” three Iranian nuclear facilities has hit a snag, as a leaked Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) report suggests the strikes merely delayed Iran’s nuclear ambitions by months. The report, which sparked a firestorm within the administration, has officials scrambling to discredit its findings, labeling it “low confidence” due to limited data.

The strikes, authorized amid rising tensions between Israel and Iran, were touted by Trump as a decisive blow. Gen. Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, backed the president, noting “extremely severe damage” to all three sites, though a final assessment is still weeks away. Experts, however, caution that piecing together the full impact requires a complex blend of satellite imagery, signals intelligence, and human sources—a process that could take months.

Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro emphasized the need for patience, warning against snap judgments based solely on early satellite data. “It’s one piece of a much larger puzzle,” he said, suggesting significant damage was likely but not total destruction. Meanwhile, Iran’s foreign minister acknowledged “serious damage” to the facilities, contradicting the Ayatollah’s downplaying of the strikes.

The administration’s pushback, led by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, highlights the DIA report’s preliminary nature. Experts like Rob Greenway, a former Trump National Security Council official, argue the sheer scale of the attack—over 14 massive 30,000-lb. bombs—likely rendered the sites unusable. “We doubled the ordnance to ensure we wouldn’t need a second trip,” Greenway quipped.

Adding to the drama, the FBI is now hunting for the leaker who shared the report with the press. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt called the breach “irresponsible,” vowing accountability. As the intelligence community works to refine its assessment, the strikes’ true impact remains a high-stakes question, with global implications hanging in the balance.