President Donald Trump’s claims about successful military strikes on Iranian nuclear sites have been contradicted by preliminary intelligence assessments, continuing his pattern of making false statements to Congress and his own statements at a NATO summit in the Netherlands.
According to MSNBC, the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency revealed that U.S. airstrikes were not as successful as Trump initially claimed. Their assessment showed that the strikes only managed to delay Iran’s nuclear program by three to six months, rather than causing complete destruction as Trump had previously stated.
During a press conference, Trump lashed out at several American news organizations, calling them ‘scum’ for reporting that he had misled the public, prompting critics like Bernie Sanders to call out Trump’s ‘lies all the time about the operation’s success. This came after his confusing statements, where he both claimed the strikes caused “total obliteration” while also admitting that intelligence was “very inconclusive.”
Intelligence reports show strikes were less effective than claimed
The initial assessment from the Defense Intelligence Agency directly challenges Trump’s earlier statements about “obliterating” Iran’s nuclear program. Despite this evidence, Trump continued to insist at the NATO summit that the strikes had set Iran back by decades.
Lmao, trumps US Intel reported trumps bombing didn't hit any nuclear sites yet trump out there celebrating a lie and false mission. No cease fire deal has been met, no deals trump out put there hasn't happened it's been 156 way over his lies about 90 deals in 90!days lmao pic.twitter.com/VAq8LlQHsg
— Native media(@carnage_media) June 25, 2025
Trump’s Cabinet officials, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, supported his claims. The New York Times reported that Trump has been closely monitoring which administration members use his preferred language when discussing the strikes.
At the NATO press conference, Trump’s statements became increasingly contradictory. He claimed that intelligence was “very inconclusive” and that “we don’t know” the extent of the damage, while simultaneously declaring that the strikes resulted in “obliteration” of the targets.
These inconsistencies have raised questions about the true impact of the military operation. While Trump describes it as “one of the most successful military strikes in history,” the preliminary intelligence assessment suggests a much more limited effect, creating a stark contrast between official findings and the former president’s public statements.
