Trump Launches Major Iran Strike as Nuclear Talks Collapse

47 years of conflict just exploded into open warfare. That's how long President Donald Trump says America has been locked in confrontation with Iran—from the 1979 Tehran embassy hostage crisis to this morning's massive military strikes that he calls "Operation Epic Fury."

The president announced the coordinated U.S.-Israeli attack in a video posted to Truth Social, declaring that American forces are conducting a "massive and ongoing" operation to eliminate what he termed "imminent threats" from Iran's "very wicked radical dictatorship."

Eight Months Later, Round Two Begins

This marks the second major U.S. military operation against Iran in eight months, following last year's "Operation Midnight Hammer" that targeted the country's nuclear facilities. But this time, Israel joined the fight—a significant escalation that transforms a bilateral conflict into a regional war.

The strikes began at 1:15 a.m. Washington time, targeting Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps command centers, Iranian air defenses, and missile launch sites. In what may prove the most consequential blow, an Israeli strike reportedly killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and up to 10 other top Iranian officials, according to Fox News citing U.S. officials.

Iran responded swiftly, launching retaliatory strikes against U.S. military facilities in Qatar, Kuwait, the UAE, and Bahrain. While U.S. Central Command reported no American casualties and "minimal" damage, the tit-for-tat exchanges signal the beginning of a broader regional conflict.

When Diplomacy Dies, Bombs Fall

The military action caps months of deadlocked indirect negotiations between Washington and Tehran over Iran's nuclear program. "They rejected every opportunity to renounce their nuclear ambitions, and we can't take it anymore," Trump said, explaining his decision to abandon diplomatic efforts.

The U.S. had been ratcheting up pressure through increased military presence in the Middle East and around Iranian borders. But rather than bringing Iran to the negotiating table, the pressure campaign appears to have hardened positions on both sides. Trump accused Iran of attempting to "rebuild their nuclear program" and developing long-range missiles that could threaten Europe and eventually reach American soil.

"It has always been the policy of the United States, in particular, my administration that this terrorist regime can never have a nuclear weapon," Trump declared. His message to Iran was uncompromising: total "obliteration" of its missile capabilities and navy.

Capitol Hill's Divided Response

Congressional reactions split predictably along party lines, but with notable nuances. House Speaker Mike Johnson backed the operation, saying Iran faces "the severe consequences of its evil actions." He emphasized that the administration "made every effort to pursue peaceful and diplomatic solutions" before resorting to force.

However, Rep. Jim Himes, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, delivered a scathing assessment: "This is a war of choice with no strategic endgame." His warning proved prescient: "Military action in this region almost never ends well for the United States, and conflict with Iran can easily spiral and escalate in ways we cannot anticipate."

The China Factor

The timing raises uncomfortable questions about America's strategic priorities. Just as Washington seeks to focus on deterring its "top geopolitical rival" China, it's now committing significant military resources to another Middle Eastern conflict. This creates a classic strategic dilemma: can America fight effectively on two fronts?

Trump's message to the Iranian people suggests ambitions beyond military strikes. "Take over your government" when U.S. operations conclude, he urged, calling it "probably your only chance for generations." This rhetoric of regime change transforms what began as nuclear nonproliferation into something far more ambitious—and potentially more costly.