**Trump Responds to Controversial Intelligence on US Strikes Against Iran**

In a NATO summit, President Trump defended the US strikes on Iran following a leaked assessment indicating limited success, emphasizing a narrative of substantial damage to Tehran's nuclear program.

Former President Donald Trump and his administration have taken a strong stance against a recent leaked intelligence report that claims the US military strikes on Iran resulted in minimal impact on the country's nuclear capabilities. During a NATO summit held in The Hague on Wednesday, Trump declared that the airstrikes inflicted "virtual obliteration" to Iran's nuclear program, delaying its advancement by "decades," contrary to the report's suggestion of only a few months of setback.

Trump's comments came in response to an assessment from credible sources who informed CBS News that the strikes on Iran's heavily fortified nuclear facilities at Fordo and Natanz managed to seal off their entrances but did not dismantle any underground structures. The report indicated that the damage caused by the bombs was minimal and did not eliminate Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium. In defense of the US military action, Trump suggested that reports claiming a limited impact lacked credibility and portrayed them as "flat-out wrong."

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth corroborated Trump's assertions, calling the preliminary Pentagon assessment "low confidence," thereby casting doubt on its reliability. Both officials acknowledged that the leaked information was still under investigation by the FBI. Trump, acknowledging some uncertainty in intelligence, stated the results were "very inconclusive" but later characterized the airstrikes as "very severe," paralleling them with the atomic bombings in Hiroshima.

As the US military's image of successful operations continues to clash with leaked intelligence assessments, the controversy surrounding the strikes and their effectiveness continues to unfold. Sources familiar with the assessments noted that some of Iran's enriched uranium stock had been relocated prior to the strikes, indicating that the impact may be even less severe than initially reported. Despite this, both US and Israeli officials hailed the military action as a success, while Iranian officials claimed the targeted locations had been previously evacuated, mitigating any potential damage.

The debate reflects the complex environment of US intelligence reports, where differences arise between various agencies, and echoes ongoing global concerns regarding Iran's nuclear ambitions.