U.S. Strikes on Iranian Nuclear Sites: Damage and Uranium Movement Analysis
Insufficient evidence prevents a definitive judgment on whether the U.S. strikes fully destroyed Iran’s nuclear facilities or whether enriched uranium was relocated beforehand.
US/IRAN — On June 22, 2025, U.S. B-2 bombers struck Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, prompting divergent accounts about the operation’s impact and Iran’s handling of its enriched uranium stockpile.
U.S. officials, including President Donald Trump and the Pentagon, assert that the facilities were “completely and totally obliterated” and deny that Iran relocated uranium prior to the strikes. Conversely, mainstream media reports, intelligence assessments, satellite imagery, and statements from Iranian officials suggested that much of the uranium was moved beforehand and that the facilities, while damaged, sustained limited destruction.
Mainstream Media, Iranian Accounts
Mainstream media outlets, including CNN, NPR, The New York Times, and Reuters, report that Iran likely relocated its enriched uranium before the U.S. strikes. CNN, citing seven sources familiar with an early Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) assessment, stated that the strikes “did not destroy the nuclear sites” and left centrifuges “largely intact,” with most uranium moved prior to the operation (Exclusive: Early US intel assessment suggests strikes on Iran did not destroy nuclear sites, sources say). NPR corroborated this with satellite imagery from the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, showing trucks at Isfahan and Fordow the day before the strikes, interpreted by experts as evidence of material movement (Satellites show damage to Iran's nuclear program, but experts say it's not destroyed).
David Albright, a former UN weapons inspector, told NPR that Iran probably transferred uranium to covert facilities for further enrichment, while Jeffrey Lewis, a Middlebury professor, noted the imagery’s consistency with preemptive relocation. The New York Times, referencing the DIA report, estimated that Iran’s nuclear program was set back by “only a few months,” not years, due to intact core components and relocated stockpiles (Strike Set Back Iran’s Nuclear Program by Only a Few Months, U.S. Report Says). The Washington Post echoed this, highlighting that the strikes left uranium reserves unaffected (U.S. damage report: Iran nuclear program set back by months, not obliterated).
Iranian claims of minimal damage may downplay losses but do align with mainstream media accounts and satellite imagery.
Pentagon/White House Accounts
U.S. officials present a contrasting view, emphasizing the strikes’ success. President Trump declared the nuclear facilities “completely and totally obliterated,” rejecting claims of uranium relocation.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth described the operation as a “resounding success,” asserting that it “decimated” Iran’s nuclear capabilities and set the program back by years, ending a 12-day war with Israel.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine reported “extremely severe damage and destruction,” with pilots noting a “brightest explosion” from 14 GBU-57 “bunker buster” bombs dropped during Operation Midnight Hammer.
The Pentagon highlighted the GBU-57’s development over 15 years to penetrate Iran’s deep underground sites like Fordow, claiming the strikes fulfilled a long-planned objective. Hegseth cited supporting statements from the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission and the IAEA’s Rafael Grossi, who acknowledged “enormous damage,” though the IAEA’s full statement nuanced this by noting no radiological release.
The Pentagon dismissed the leaked DIA report as “preliminary” and “low confidence,” arguing it contradicted assessments from allies and the United Nations. President Trump also said that information about the strikes was leaked.
According to a Pentagon assessment, the strikes were "historically successful" and had been planned for around 15 years and ended with the "destruction of Iran's nuclear capabilities".
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said of the strikes, "President Donald J. Trump directed the most complex and secretive military operation in history, and it was a resounding success, resulting in a cease-fire agreement and the end of the 12-day war [between Iran and Israel]," adding, "Because of decisive military action, President Trump created the conditions to end the war, [while also] decimating — choose your word — obliterating, destroying, Iran's nuclear capabilities."
According to the assessment, the U.S. worked for 15 years to develop the GPU-57 "bunker buster" bomb after realizing that the united States did not have the capability of reaching Iran's deep underground nuclear facilities.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Air Force Gen. Dan Caine said, "They tested it over and over again, tried different options, tried more after that — they accomplished hundreds of test shots and dropped many full-scale weapons against extremely realistic targets, for a single purpose: kill this target at the time and place of our nation's choosing."
According to the Pentagon briefing, "As part of Operation Midnight Hammer, directed by the president, on June 21, at 6:45 p.m., which is Sunday, June 22, at 2:15 a.m. in Iran, U.S. B-2 Spirit bombers out of Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri, dropped 14 of those GBU-57 bombs onto Fordow and a second nuclear facility, destroying the facilities and setting back Iranian nuclear efforts by years."
"We know that the trailing jets saw the first weapons function, and the pilot stated, 'this was the brightest explosion that I've ever seen. It literally looked like daylight."
Pentagon Addresses Leaked Preliminary DIA Report On The Strikes
The Pentagon also addressed the leaked preliminary DIA assessment on the strikes cited by mainstream news agencies.
According to Hegseth, "The DIA that put that report out says this is a preliminary, low confidence report and will continue to be refined as additional intelligence becomes available."
He then said, "How about the Israeli Atomic Energy Commission? The devastating US strikes on Fordo destroyed the site's critical infrastructure and rendered the enrichment facility inoperable.
Have any of these quotes made their way into The New York Times or The Washington Post, MSNBC, CNN? Any of these quotes? How about this one? This is a new one from the UN, the United Nations, no friend of the United States or, certainly, Israel often. Here's the head of the UN Atomic Energy Agency this morning, Rafael Grossi. US and Israeli strikes caused enormous damage to Iran's nuclear sites.
Don't take my word for it. How about the IDF's Chief of staff? I can say here that the assessment is that we significantly damaged the nuclear program, setting it back by years, I repeat years. The Iranian foreign minister, the spokesman, our nuclear installations have been badly damaged, that's for sure. I'm sure that's an understatement."
White House: Iran’s Nuclear Facilities Have Been Obliterated — and Suggestions Otherwise are Fake News
Evaluation of U.S. Strikes on Iranian Nuclear Facilities and Potential Uranium Movement
While authoritative sources like the Pentagon and White House carry significant weight, their claims require substantiation beyond statements. Insufficient data currently prevents a definitive conclusion, necessitating ongoing monitoring of emerging evidence.
Official U.S. sources, including President Donald Trump and the Pentagon, assert that the strikes “completely obliterated” Iran’s nuclear facilities, with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth describing the operation as a “resounding success”. These claims, however, rely primarily on operational reports and lack detailed post-strike evidence, such as comprehensive damage assessments. This is understandable, as detailed damage assessments, especially on strikes on nuclear facilities located deep underground would take more time and cannot be done within only a few days after the strike.
A preliminary Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) report, cited by The New York Times, suggests the strikes delayed Iran’s nuclear program by months, not years, with critical components like centrifuges remaining largely intact. The Pentagon dismissed this as “preliminary” and “low confidence,” indicating potential revisions. The preliminary nature of the report, issued shortly after the strikes, limits its reliability as a final verdict.
Technical constraints further complicate claims of total destruction. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi previously indicated that Fordow’s deepest infrastructure, estimated at 800 meters underground, exceeds the 60-meter (200-foot) penetration capability of the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator through reinforced concrete. This suggests that sensitive equipment, such as advanced centrifuges, may have remained beyond the bombs’ reach. Without robust post-strike data, neither complete destruction nor minimal damage can be confirmed.
Satellite imagery from the Middlebury Institute, reported by NPR, documented trucks at Fordow and Isfahan on June 21, 2025, interpreted as potential evidence of material movement. Iranian official Hassan Abedini claimed enriched uranium was transferred to secure locations.
President Trump countered that the vehicles were “cars and small trucks” used for concrete work to reinforce shaft entrances, arguing that moving uranium would be too time-consuming, hazardous, and heavy. Enriched uranium, stored as uranium hexafluoride (UF6) in steel cylinders, is relatively lightweight, with 400 kg transportable in a few cylinders using standard cargo trucks (10–40-ton capacity).
Conversely, concrete for shaft reinforcement, at 2,400–2,500 kg per cubic meter, requires heavier vehicles and days of preparation, inconsistent with the observed trucks and one-day timeline. Iran’s history of contingency planning supports the feasibility of uranium relocation, but the imagery alone does not clarify the trucks’ purpose.
Conclusion
Insufficient evidence prevents a definitive judgment on whether the U.S. strikes fully destroyed Iran’s nuclear facilities or whether enriched uranium was relocated beforehand.
The GBU-57’s limited penetration depth, as noted by IAEA’s Grossi, suggests that Fordow’s critical infrastructure likely survived, casting doubt on claims of total destruction, but lack of evidence prevents those claims from being completely refuted.
Satellite imagery indicates truck activity consistent with possible uranium movement, but Trump’s assertion of concrete work remains plausible absent clearer data.
Given the reliance of official U.S. claims on statements without substantiation and the preliminary nature of the DIA report, further evidence is needed. Monitoring for additional primary source data will inform future assessments.