According to a Tuesday CNN report issued as bombs fly between Israel and Iran, US intelligence assessed that Iran was not actively pursuing nuclear weapons ahead of last Friday’s Israeli attack and, even if it chose to, it would take up to three years to develop and deliver one.
This of course directly contradicts Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s justification for launching the major airstrikes on Iran, which have continued and intensified, based on claims that Iran was close to obtaining a nuclear bomb.
Israel has been framing it as ‘preemptive’ – but even this term presumes that a foreign enemy was imminently about to attack, and thus preemptive action needed to be taken. Watch CNN clips of Netanyahu warning an Iranian bomb is imminent, spanning some 30 years:
CNN put together a collection of clips of Netanyahu warning Iran is close to a nuclear weapon going back to 1996 pic.twitter.com/Pt2Bmys994
— Acyn (@Acyn) June 18, 2025
President Trump in Tuesday comments aboard Air Force One dismissed the views of his own Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard, who had stated that Iran’s nuclear weapons program remained suspended since 2003. She indicated in prior senate testimony and that Ayatollah Khamenei had not authorized a restart.
But Trump instead publicly aligned with Netanyahu’s claims. “I don’t care what she said. They were very close to getting a nuke,” he told reporters. The CIA had also recently said it does not assess Tehran is seeking nukes, as did the latest DNI report submitted to Congress.
As a reminder, the attack by Israel occurred just two days before scheduled US-Iran negotiations, during which Iran was expected to present a counter-proposal, and had been resistant to Trump’s demands of zero enrichment.
And more footage of Bibi, with one clip all the way back in 1995: “Any day now…”
So did the daily show! pic.twitter.com/wD5EmUonTF
— Ð~Panda (@topherAlba26) June 18, 2025
Of course, these talks were immediately nixed after Israel’s military action, effectively derailing diplomatic efforts, and any effort to restart remains an open question.
The IAEA is still not even willing to say Iran is actively working toward a nuclear bomb. We “did not have any proof” of the systematic pursuit of a bomb, the UN nuclear watchdog directors says…
Iran Near-Bomb-Grade Uranium’s Location Uncertain, UN Says
IAEA Chief Grossi:
What we reported was that we did not have any proof of a systematic effort (by Iran) to move toward a nuclear weapon. pic.twitter.com/QQWcK1tarV
— Clash Report (@clashreport) June 18, 2025
In the below, co-founder and executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, Trita Parsi, provides some analysis of how President Trump appears to have fallen into an Israeli ‘trap’ [emphasis ZH]…
Important to understand how Trump got America into war with Iran despite saying he wanted peace.
The original sin is that Trump walked into Israel’s trap halfway through the negotiations when he moved the goalpost and adopted zero-enrichment fantasy, i.e. that his red line was the elimination of Iran’s enrichment program altogether, rather than restricting it.
The Israelis knew very well that Iran never would agree to such capitulation (at least short of war). Predictably, and by design, this position led to a deadlock in the talks. This deeply frustrated the impatient Trump.
Predictably, the Israelis stepped in and convinced Trump to give them a yellow/green light to bomb Iran in order to soften its negotiating stance.
Predictably, bombing Iran hardened their position and prompted Tehran to fight back by targeting Israel with missiles.
Predictably, within 24-48h, the Israelis returned to Washington and insisted that the US needed to step in to finish the war. (Israel has sought to trap the US into war with Iran for more than 20 years.)
Much indicates that this was the Israeli plan from the outset. Had Trump not walked into the Israeli trap and adopted zero enrichment, there would likely have been a framework nuclear deal by now.
Is there a way out of the trap? So far, Trump is content to keep giving Israel the greenlight for strikes, but appears to be resisting direct US military involvement. But the more unpredictable and retaliatory the battlespace becomes, the more that pressure from hawks grows for Washington to get directly involved.
Loading…
