In a shocking development, questions have arisen about the accuracy of U.S. President Donald Trump’s claims regarding the success of recent U.S. airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. The strikes, targeting key sites at Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan, were described by Trump as a “spectacular military success” that “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s nuclear capabilities. However, newly released evidence, reportedly from NASA, has cast doubt on these assertions, suggesting the operation—codenamed Midnight Hammer—may have missed critical targets, sparking a firestorm of debate about the effectiveness of the high-stakes mission.
The controversy erupted after satellite imagery, allegedly provided by NASA, surfaced, showing limited damage to Iran’s heavily fortified Fordo facility, a uranium enrichment site buried deep beneath a mountain. Trump had claimed the strikes, involving B-2 stealth bombers and 30,000-pound Massive Ordnance Penetrator bombs, devastated Iran’s nuclear program. Yet, the imagery reveals only superficial damage, with key infrastructure intact and no significant radiation leaks, contradicting the administration’s narrative of “monumental damage.” An Iranian official, cited by state media, claimed the sites were evacuated beforehand, with enriched uranium reserves moved, further undermining Trump’s claims of a decisive blow.
The operation, launched on June 21, 2025, marked a historic escalation in the U.S.-Iran conflict, aligning with Israel’s ongoing campaign against Tehran’s nuclear ambitions. Trump, flanked by Vice President JD Vance and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, hailed the strikes as a triumph, warning Iran of further attacks if it retaliated. However, a Defense Intelligence Agency report, cited by lawmakers, suggests the strikes set Iran’s nuclear program back by mere months, not years, with core components surviving. This has fueled criticism from figures like Senator Mark Kelly, who noted the difficulty in assessing damage to underground sites, and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who called the strikes “grounds for impeachment” due to lack of congressional approval.
The release of NASA’s imagery, though unconfirmed by official channels, has intensified scrutiny. Posts on X amplified the controversy, with some users claiming the strikes were a “nothingburger,” pointing to reports from Iran’s state media and Saudi Arabia’s radiation commission showing no significant impact or radiation changes. These claims remain unverified, but they’ve added to the narrative that Trump may have overstated the operation’s success to bolster his image amid domestic and international pressure.
Iran has vowed retaliation, with Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi warning of “everlasting consequences.” The country’s parliament even voted to consider closing the Strait of Hormuz, a move that could disrupt global oil supplies. Meanwhile, the international community, including the UN’s nuclear watchdog, has reported no radiation spikes, suggesting the strikes avoided catastrophic fallout but also failed to destroy key assets.
This unfolding saga has raised questions about Trump’s foreign policy gamble and its implications for U.S. credibility. As analysts debate whether the strikes were a strategic misstep or a calculated show of force, the world watches closely for Iran’s next move, with fears of a broader conflict looming. The NASA evidence, if authentic, could reshape perceptions of the administration’s narrative, leaving Trump to navigate a growing storm of skepticism.
