'The Battle Begins'
48:20 Share

This episode is brought to you by LifeLock. Between two-factor authentication, strong passwords, and a VPN, you try to be in control of how your info is protected. But many other places also have it, and they might not be as careful. That's why LifeLock monitors hundreds of millions of data points a second for threats. If your identity is stolen, they'll fix it, guaranteed, or your money back. Save up to 40% your first year. Visit LifeLock.com slash podcast for 40% off. Terms apply.

This is CNN breaking news

And we're continuing to follow that breaking news and the widening conflict between Israel and Iran. Good morning, everybody. I'm Adi Cornish in Washington. And I'm John Berman in New York. Thank you for waking up with us. The battle begins. Those words posted just a few hours ago by Iran's supreme leader as we now enter day six of deadly airstrikes between Israel and Iran, airstrikes which have led to hundreds of casualties already.

And now the question looming over everything: Will the U.S. get involved? Sources tell CNN President Trump is now warming up to the idea of using U.S. military assets to strike at the heart of Iran's nuclear program located beneath a mountain fortress

in the northern part of the country. As the U.S. weighs its options, more missiles are flying in the skies over Iran. According to local media reports, air defense systems in Tehran have been activated amid another barrage of Israeli strikes. Israel's military says 50 jets launched attacks on nuclear facilities overnight.

The president is also demanding Iran's unconditional surrender on social media while declaring the country will never get a nuclear weapon. I told them to do the deal. They should have done the deal. Their cities have been blown to pieces and lost a lot of people. They should have done the deal. I told them, do the deal. So I don't know, I'm not too much in a mood to negotiate.

Now, in a moment, we're going to be hearing from some of our CNN International diplomatic staff, including editor Nick Robertson. Right now, you're seeing some of those images from overnight as these airstrikes continue into the sixth day.

One of the questions will be the president's potential involvement. What will the U.S. be involved in going forward? CNN's Nick Robertson is here to give us some more insight. Nick, can you tell us more about what's been going on overnight?

Yeah, I think that the perception you get here, and this is certainly what the IDF is telling us at the moment, is that Iran's ballistic missile count in coming to Israel is diminishing down to about 30 different missiles, ballistic missiles that were fired into Israel last night. No casualties. The air defense is working again here in the center of Israel.

But it does seem, and the IDF is saying that this could be as a result of their attacks on the launch sites, their attacks on weapons storage facilities, their attacks on their defensive systems against the ballistic missiles, that Iran is just not able to get off as many ballistic missiles as they were before. Israel, for its part, said it had 50 fighter jets in the air, in operations,

over Iran last night for about three hours in three different waves. But also from the Israeli side, those 50 fighter jets, significant number, but it's also down over previous days. But I think the reality that seems to emerge here on the military front is that

Iran's punch into Israel is getting weaker. And Israel says its control of the airspace in Iran is getting stronger. But then in the diplomatic space that you're talking about, the possibility of President Trump weighing the consideration of joining Israel in trying to destroy Iran's nuclear production facilities,

That is something that everyone here is watching. And I've been talking to some former intelligence experts, Israeli intelligence experts on Iran. And one thing that gives them a slight pause for concern is the language that President Trump is using, calling on the Iranian leadership for unconditional surrender.

The experts I'm talking to here think that is counterproductive in the way that Iran will respond and reduces the likelihood that it might come to the negotiating table. CNN's Nick Robertson, thank you. John? Yeah, on that point, while President Trump calls for Iran's unconditional surrender, Iranian leaders, they are showing no signs of backing down. Iran's military says it has now deployed hypersonic ballistic missiles on targets across Israel.

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also posted on social media, quote, we will show the Zionists no mercy. With us now, CNN chief international security correspondent Nick Payton Walsh. And Nick, you've been crunching the numbers, really looking into what weapons Iran might have left. What are you on? Where are you on that?

Yeah, I wish I could give you a really precise definitive number because ultimately what's left in Iran's arsenal dictates its appetite or frankly its capability for a fight going forward. If it's unable to have enough medium-range ballistic missiles that it could hit Israel with or indeed potentially in the extraordinary move of Iran deciding to widen the conflict and hit back or hit U.S. bases, then Iran really is increasingly...

delivering hollow rhetoric and increasingly a spent military force. Now some of the best estimates at the start of this conflict prior to it, in fact maybe even a year plus ago, suggested Iran probably had

at most 2,000 medium-range ballistic missiles. You're seeing there, I think, surface-to-air missiles, different types of missiles being taken out there by the Israelis. The calculations since that estimate are very interesting because back in April, 120 were used, according to the Israeli, to try and hit Israel, 200.

in October in a second wave of strikes and then the current estimate is about 400 have indeed been used. That means about 700, 750 have been taken out of that 2,000 arsenal which could leave them with about 1,200 or so left. But some of the lesser estimates suggest Iran maybe only has a thousand

of these medium-range missiles. So there's a huge scope there for interpretation and assessment but ultimately it means Iran maybe has 200 or 1200 left and most experts we speak to say they'd never want to get below a thousand at all just to have something in reserve for existential defense. Israel too hitting their missile launchers and indeed hitting their weapons supplies so that number constantly dynamic.

But it's key because we're about to hear from Ayatollah Khamenei in his first major speech since his initial reaction to it. And in that, I'm sure he will lay out exactly what Iran's next steps would be or provide some kind of rhetorical fuel to continue. But be in no doubt, we've seen Iran significantly militarily weakened, and that's going to dictate its options, not the words it chooses to use. John? It's certainly taxing the Iranian system right now. CNN chief international security correspondent Nick Payton-Walsh

Thank you so much. You know, in Audi, what's really shifted, it seems, over the last 24 hours or since yesterday afternoon when the president was in the Situation Room, it really does seem like all signs in the momentum drifting toward military action. Maybe it doesn't happen. Maybe they pull back. But closing the embassy in Jerusalem, sending those refueling planes to the region, it seems like the U.S. is doing everything it can right now to be ready

to strike. Very much so. And though we want to note right now, there is going to be, as you said, a closed consular offices, U.S. private citizens. It's not clear what support they're going to get, given that the airports are closed and seaports as well. We're continuing to monitor the breaking news in the Middle East as the president warns his patience is wearing thin. So is the U.S. on the verge of getting involved in this conflict.

Plus, Israel hopes the U.S. will deliver on a weapon that could potentially take out Iran's underground nuclear facility. It's called a bunker buster bomb. We're going to explain to you what that is. In order for Fordow to be taken out by a bomb from the sky, the only country in the world that has that bomb is the United States.

Hi, this is Joe from Vanta. In today's digital world, compliance regulations are changing constantly, and earning customer trust has never mattered more. Vanta helps companies get compliant fast and stay secure with the most advanced AI, automation, and continuous monitoring out there. So whether you're a startup going for your first SOC 2 or ISO 27001, or a growing enterprise managing vendor RIST, Vanta makes it quick, easy, and scalable. And I'm not just saying that because I work here. Get started at vanta.com.

I'm CNN tech reporter Claire Duffy. This week on the podcast, Terms of Service, tech entrepreneur and investor Kevin Rose, he is relaunching the platform that he founded in 2004 called Dig, hopefully making social media and the internet a bit more human, right? Yeah, 100%. Just given the chaos that is social media, where AI is coming online in a way that we

We're pretty optimistic and be quite helpful in solving a lot of these bigger problems. Listen to CNN's Terms of Service with me, Claire Duffy, wherever you get your podcasts or watch it on Spotify. Returning now to our breaking news coverage with President Trump's evolution on the conflict in the Middle East, because as a candidate, he's often spoke about ending the war quickly.

Get it over with and let's get back to peace and stop killing people. And that's a very simple statement. They have to get it done. Get it over with and get it over with fast because we have to get back to normalcy and peace. Fast forward to now when the president is demanding Iran's unconditional surrender as he weighs further U.S. involvement.

Sometimes they have to fight it out, but we're going to see what happens. I think there's a good chance there'll be a deal. Have you asked Israel to pause their airstrikes into Iran? Well, I don't want to say that. President Trump authorized a military strike that took out a high-ranking Iranian general in his first term. His approach to U.S. involvement has typically walked a fine line between unpredictability and calculated force. So what's behind the shift from talking peace to terms of surrender?

Joining me now is Joel Rubin, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, and Kim Dozier, CNN Global Affairs Analyst. I want to come to some of those diplomatic questions in a moment. But first, I want to get the lay of the land, help people understand how we got here. Because you had national security leader, Gabby Tulsi, Tulsi Gabbard,

testifying before Congress about the state of Iran's nuclear program. Kim, can you talk about what she said now versus what we're seeing now? Well, in March, she testified that Iran was months away from breakout, nuclearizing, weaponizing its nuclear material. But I spoke to people in the first Trump administration who said that Iran was days from refining its nuclear

60% refined nuclear material into weapons-sufficientable material, and days to weeks from turning that into a weapon, 'cause these are two processes. - Yeah, but it's important because the pretext for this war is Israel saying Iran is a threat, an imminent threat. The U.S. has been brought into Middle East wars in the past when there's been an imminent threat of weapons of mass destruction. I think people at home want to get a sense of what the intelligence community knows.

Well, I just want to add the decision at the time was that the Ayatollah had decided we could, but we won't. And that assessment could change at any time. Maybe President Trump is reacting to that. The Israelis always disagreed with the slowly, slowly estimate. They said just the fact that they're this close is unacceptable. Right.

Yeah, Adi, look, I chuckled a bit on how did we get here because it's not just the past couple of weeks or months. It's been a decade in the making. President Trump had a nuclear deal that was working when he was in his first term. It was preventing Iran from getting to the point that it's at right now.

And he tore up that deal in 2018, and we have not been able to get back into it. And the result is what we see now. It was highly predictable. President Obama predicted it. Predictable in that Iran would continue to enrich and accelerate. And now Iran has gone way beyond any acceptable levels. And that's the problem. The International Atomic Energy Agency predicts

verified that they are out of compliance. The first time in 20 years they were censured. - And that happened just a few weeks ago. - It's very, very dangerous. And so I think that was the trip wire, plus of course the military situation in the region, much more favorable to Israel for conducting strikes without as much concern about being hit.

by Hezbollah as an example, which no longer is a threat from the north in any way like it used to be because of Israeli actions. So all of that came together and that's why we're now at this moment where Israel saw a moment to strike. Iran was advancing too far, but this has been a decade in the making. - And now the question is, will the US follow? I want you guys to stay with me as we talk more about this today. Next on CNN this morning, American troops in the Middle East on high alert. Are US bases at risk for retaliatory strikes from Iran?

And looking live right now at Tel Aviv as we continue to monitor this escalating conflict between Israel and Iran. Stay with us.

If the United States decides to join Israel's conflict with Iran, the consequences could be considerable. As of now, the United States has about 47,000 troops stationed at nine facilities in the Middle East. The New York Times reports Iran has prepared missiles and other military equipment for strikes on U.S. bases in the Mideast should the U.S. join Israel's war against the country.

The USS Nimitz, a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, is now en route to the Arabian Sea. It is accompanied by a full complement of aircraft and it is being escorted by five guided missile destroyers. The Nimitz is joining the USS Carl Vinson strike group, which is already deployed in the region.

We've been trying to sink our Navy ships in the Red Sea through the Houthi rebels. They've been actively attacking U.S. forces, U.S. uniformed forces throughout the region for a year and a half now through the Houthis, Hamas, and Hezbollah. So it would be new in one certain paradigm, but the truth is they've been directly killing American servicemen for years.

With us now, retired Army Brigadier General Steve Anderson. General, thank you so much for being with us. Talk about why Israel would need the United States to get involved and what the United States would get from that. Well, thank you, John. Yes, absolutely. We've got Israel would need the United States to get involved, that they really want to take out the hardened nuclear enrichment facility at Fordow.

The United States could use the bunker busters, the GPU-57s that can penetrate perhaps 200 feet of hardened facilities, probably would require multiple uses of that munition. It would be delivered by a B-2 bomber based out of Diego Garcia.

about five hours of flying time to get on site to Fordow. The Israelis have been successful in establishing air superiority. So I believe that there would be a low risk using those B-2s. So primarily the United States would be used by Israel to provide this munition. What's the risk for the United States here if it does get involved? Specifically, what's the risk to U.S. forces in the region?

Well, as you said earlier, there's about 47,000 troops in the area. They've been getting attacked for quite some time now. We've got a large presence in Kuwait. We've got a huge presence in Al Udeid Air Base and in Beiran where we've got a naval base.

Most of these facilities are defended by sufficient air defense. We've got Patriot in most of these facilities, if not all. We've got CRAM, which is counter rocket artillery and mortar, very effective systems that I use in Afghanistan. They'll shoot out anything bigger than a soccer ball that tries to come across the FOB's perimeter.

very effective air defense systems. Of course, the Israelis have been very successful in degrading the capability of the proxies. So I think that the risk from Hamas

from Hezbollah especially. Of course, Syria has had a regime change now. The Houthis have been hit hard. Their ability of the proxies to help the Iranians attack the United States has been seriously degraded. I think, though, that if Iran were to attack the United States

That's just the excuse that President Trump would be using, would be needing to get involved and provide active support. So I think it'd be a terrible mistake on their part. But again, our troops are prepared. They're protected. They've got air defenses. And I believe that they'll be able to withstand the attacks that may very well come out of this. General, I got to let you go, but very quickly, do you personally think it's worth it for the U.S. to get involved?

No, I do not. I do not believe that we should get involved unless we're directly attacked. I think the Israelis are doing a great job. They've got air superiority. They've got intelligence superiority. They're doing they're taking the hurt to the Iranians. This is going just fine. There's no reason why you can't let this play out. Let the Iranians, let the Israelis and the Iranians duke this out. Let the Israelis are definitely winning this campaign. They need to continue the attack. The United States needs to stay out.

Retired Army Brigadier General Steve Anderson, thank you so much for sharing that perspective. And Adi, it is interesting. I mean, that is the type of argument, at least one argument, that no doubt President Trump is hearing in the Situation Room as he makes this consideration. And the question is the conflicting arguments that is also coming in from outside the White House, right, from the very much changing Republican Party. You know, after the break on CNN this morning, we're going to be continuing to monitor breaking news out of the Middle East.

Is regime change in Iran Israel's final goal? Plus, Israel wants a weapon only the U.S. can provide. But will the Trump administration deliver? This is CNN Breaking News.

We're following the breaking news out of the Middle East, the escalating conflict between Israel and Iran. Good morning everybody, I'm Adi Cornish. And I'm John Berman. Any moment now, Iran's supreme leader is expected to address his nation for the first time since Friday when these strikes began. Overnight, Israel and Iran trading new blows. Israel sent more than 50 jets to assist in strikes on Iranian centrifuge and missile production sites overnight.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office says Iran has launched more than 400 missiles toward Israel since Friday, including a new wave overnight leading to explosions in Tel Aviv. You can hear the air raid sirens. All while President Trump weighs the possibility of U.S. involvement, direct U.S. involvement, saying America's patience is wearing thin. A real end, not a ceasefire. An end for Iran.

Two officials, two, tell CNN the president is warming up to the idea of using U.S. military assets to strike Iranian nuclear facilities, but he is still open to diplomatic solutions, Adi.

So if the U.S. does get involved, what exactly is the goal? Terms like destabilization and regime change are being thrown around. This wouldn't be the first time the U.S. got involved in shaking things up in Iran. In fact, the U.S. helped overthrow the country's first democratically elected leader in the 1950s,

and reinstate the Shah of Iran a pro-Western monarch. It was an act that led to Iran's revolution and the rise of its supreme leader, who wields both religious and political authority in the country. And even if there is regime change, some lawmakers warn of the consequences that might bring.

Whether or not Israel says that its intent is regime change, the nature of these strikes prompts the potential that this government will fall and potentially replaced by an even more dangerous regime. Joining me now to discuss is Bobby Ghosh, a columnist and geopolitical analyst. Bobby, thanks for being with us this morning.

Morning, Audie. One of the things that I heard earlier today is the question of whether Israel is going for regime change or just a failed state. Can you talk about the differences there?

Well, it seems clear that is part of Israel's intention, although there's a lot of discussion about Iran's nuclear threat. If you look at the targeting of senior leadership and if you look at some of the rhetoric coming out of Jerusalem, it seems quite clear that Benjamin Netanyahu's objectives include the decapitation, that's a word that's often used, the decapitation of both the political and military leadership of Iran.

Whether that leads to a failed state, there are two questions. One is whether that is achievable, and that might be. Israel has shown that it has both the military capacity and the intelligence capacity to locate and take out senior leadership. We saw that happen in Lebanon with Hezbollah. And so you have to assume that it can do so in Iraq.

Whether that will lead to Iran becoming a failed state is a whole separate question. Iran is not like Lebanon or Iraq or like Libya or like Syria. These are examples of countries where the removal of the top leadership led to not just regime collapse, but societal dysfunction and political dysfunction.

Iran is a very old country. The geography of Iran, the map of Iran has been more or less established and set for a very long time. It was not an artificial construct created by colonial powers, as in many of these other countries I've named. It also has a much more homogeneous population than these other countries. Iranians

whatever they feel about the regime, get along with each other. There's not a great deal of divide amongst themselves that would lead to a kind of civil war that we've seen in places like Libya, in Lebanon or in Iraq.

And this is another very important point. Iraq, Iran has some of the world's largest reserves of petroleum and natural gas hydrocarbons, which means that it has access to revenues that would help it rebuild. And because those reserves are so high, it is in the global interest for those for Iran to be able to rebuild quickly. It is in nobody's interest for Iran to become a failed state.

if you are part of the global economy, then Iranian oil and Iranian gas being part of that economy is very important, including by the way, for in America's interest, for Iran to be a stable country, regardless of what the leadership is. - Bobby, as you pointed out, Iran is not quote unquote decapitated yet. We're expected to hear from Supreme leadership today. Can you talk about what you're gonna be listening for? I don't know if the fall

of Iran's government is something that this leadership can survive. Well, the leadership is going to be, I think, defiant, as it always is in these circumstances. It will continue to send out the message that if the United States gets directly involved, as President Trump has been hinting, then there will be consequences for the United States and not just for Israel.

What I will be looking to hear is whether he, the Supreme Leader of Iran, suggests any specific targeting, whether he, in his mind, attacking the United States means simply attacking American military installations, which has been the assumption, or whether he's prepared to widen the scope of a sort of counterattack. After all, there

There are many ways to hurt the United States that don't involve attacking American military installations. The United States has other economic assets in the region. There are tens of thousands of Americans all over the Middle East. And Iran has shown in the past that it is capable and willing to attack

civilian targets all over the world in order to achieve what it regards as its aims. So that would be something I would be looking forward to hearing. But to be honest, what I suspect we'll hear is more bluster from Khamenei, the Supreme Leader, more threats of punishment and consequence if the United States gets involved.

Okay, Bobby Ghosh, columnist and geopolitics analyst. Thank you. We appreciate this. We're actually now hearing from Iran's supreme leader. He said he will not accept an imposed peace or war. He also responded to President Trump's threats

saying those who know Iran's history know that Iranians do not answer well to the language of threat. John? Yeah, we keep on monitoring what he is saying here. Sometimes the language is a bit circular and cryptic. We'll try to get a sense of what he's saying.

of the direction he seems to be pushing as he continues. In the meantime, the fallout from the widening conflict between Israel and Iran could also affect Russia, Iran's strategic partner. In recent days, now Russia has been very busy on its own. It's launched some of the deadliest drone attacks

since the start of its war against Ukraine. And remember, many of the drones it uses are based on an Iranian design or they're flat-out Iranian-made. But now the Iranians may be redirecting their own drones to use against Israel, cutting off potential reserve supply for Russia. Russia could also potentially benefit monetarily from a surge in oil prices. Attacks on regional refineries have already led to the highest oil prices in nearly five months, meaning Russia's oil exports could grow even more valuable.

With us now, CNN correspondent Claire Sebastian in London. So Claire, how could Russia factor into all of this?

Russia has a unique position, John. It has a working relationship with both sides of this conflict. And case in point, President Putin actually called the leaders of both Iran and Israel when this flared up last Friday. He then, of course, also spoke to President Trump on Saturday. And President Trump has suggested that he would be open to Russia playing a role in mediating this conflict, as it has offered to do. It is hard, I will point out.

to find anyone else, particularly among European countries, who thinks that's a good idea. Most people feel that Russia's actions waging war in the middle of Europe disqualifies it from mediating another conflict. But that offer from Russia, I think, is one of the key reasons why it does stand to benefit from this. This allows Putin to essentially burnish his image as a regional power broker, a peacemaker, both at home and abroad, though of course the pictures you show and the events in Kyiv in the last 48 hours tell a bit of a different story. The second point clearly

is the oil price. Oil is about a third of Russia's budget revenues, oil and gas, and the rise in the price off the back of several months of that price falling is extremely welcome, goes straight into the war economy. And I think thirdly, this is a distraction for the US and this is a really big deal for Russia. You see this written about a lot in Russian media. They are looking at the US now shifting its focus fully to the Middle East and

And thinking essentially that this provides an opening to Russia to finish what it has started in Ukraine with the U.S. looking elsewhere and also redirecting, as we've already seen it do, some of its military resources. John. Again, in the meantime, as the discussions continue among all these different nations, Iran Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei just saying that Iran will never be.

surrender. Claire Sebastian, thank you very much. Obviously a lot going on as this morning develops. Yes, and as people are waking up in Washington, more conversation about the future here. We want to talk about this weapon known as the Bunker Buster. It's officially known as the GBU-57.

And the bunker buster is a 30,000 pound bomb. It's capable of reaching Iran's most heavily fortified nuclear site. So this Fordow nuclear facility, it's buried deep beneath a mountain, reportedly houses close to 3,000 sophisticated centrifuges 300 feet below the Earth's surface.

Bunker Busters are considered the only bomb capable of destroying it. The U.S. is the only country that has them. They're 20 feet long, about 15 tons, and only the American B-2 stealth bomber can carry them. So if President Trump decides to target Iran's Fordow facility, we could see a scenario where an American pilot is flying an American plane and dropping an American weapon on Iran.

Joel Rubin and Kim Dozier are back with me here. The existence of this weapon is what has put this question so firmly in the hands of the US in so many ways. Kim, first, can you just talk about what it is about Fordow, why this is so significant a spot? And also, this isn't a weapon, I understand, that you can just pass off to someone else.

Well, the U.S. doesn't want to share it with anybody else. It's, as you said, it's about a 30,000-pound bomb, and it's dropped from 30,000 to 40,000 feet up, which

gives it the ability to penetrate about 200 feet into the ground. - Right, it was developed as an alternative to nuclear weapons. It's like if you need to penetrate something, is there another way to do it? And the U.S. developed this weapon. - Specifically for these kind of deep buried complexes because North Korea also has complexes like this. But the problem with this is

Right now, the Israelis just lost a drone taken out by Iranian air defenses. So that means you're not going to fly your B-2 stealth bomber during the day. You're probably going to fly it at night, which puts any potential attack a few hours from now. You're definitely not going to use a B-52, which can technically carry them, but isn't as stealthy as a B-2. And

Also, once you've done it, you can almost guarantee that Iran is going to strike back against U.S. forces based in Iraq, based in Syria, based throughout the Gulf, U.S. ships on the sea. Iran has a number of methods like swarming a large U.S. vessel with fast boats.

And it's proven with things like the attack on the USS Cole, they can take them out. - What I hear you saying is also that despite the fulsomeness of the Israeli attack to start taking out all kinds of systems, Iran is proving that it still has the ability

to respond in some way. Joel, can you talk about, as we're talking actually, the Supreme Leader is talking and talking about potential threats. We heard a guest say that, you know, attacking personnel is not the only way Iran could hurt the U.S. Can you talk about how this conversation lives alongside any conversation about diplomacy?

or a negotiating table. Why is that even still in the air, given the way this is escalating? - Well, you know, Adi, my first thought after hearing the readout of the Supreme Leader's speech is he may very well have signed his own death warrant with that speech. - Right. - Because this is the attitude that has led us into the moment that we're in right now.

Look, there have been offerings provided to the Supreme Leader for many years, including by the Trump team. And I'm not going to say that their diplomacy was incredibly robust. It was sort of trying to figure out what the opportunities were with Iran. But they did offer Secretary Rubio did offer a civilian nuclear program to Iran in exchange for no enrichment. And Iran said no. And the Supreme Leader continues to drive Iran in this direction.

And so I think this is a real moment. Going to this question about Fordow, Fordow is like a pincer grip. Yeah. And I know we might have an image of it as well, just to give people a sense of what's there. What's really important to understand now is that because of the strikes that have gone forward,

In many ways, Fordow must be hit, because if it's not hit, the enrichment capacity there is such that Iran could quickly move to enrich to weapons-grade levels and try to test a crude nuclear device. That is the fear. Yeah, we can see some of the images here. So now we're in that trap. And I believe this is actually somewhat near a holy city in Iran, but the idea is all of these other places that had been hit

Israel was able to harm their capacity. Kim, I'm in your territory now. Well, there's also another location, to pick up on what Joel was saying, where there is a stockpile of enriched nuclear material just sitting there. And the Israelis haven't hit it because they would essentially create a dirty bomb. So unless they can go in and physically take it out with commandos, if Fordow is left intact,

then the Iranians can just move that 60% refined material to Fordow and build a weapon. Okay, you guys stay with me. There's a lot more to discuss today. In moments, in fact, just moments ago, CNN, Iran's supreme leader was speaking, saying Iran will never surrender. We have reaction from on the ground in Jerusalem. Please stay with us.

Just in to CNN moments ago, Iran's supreme leader addressing his nation for the first time since the conflict began on Friday. And he has a warning for President Trump. If the U.S. intervenes, there will be, quote, irreparable damage. He went on to say that Iran will never surrender or accept an imposed peace.

I'm going to bring in now Avi Mayer, founder of the Jerusalem Journal. Avi, I know that this information has just come out, but can you talk about sort of what you were hearing, some aspects of the speech maybe some of us wouldn't have identified?

Well, Adi, we've heard a lot of rhetoric over the past few days, a lot of very scary statements and threats to the people of Israel. Last night, the threat was that Iran was going to attack Israel, something that would not be forgotten for centuries to come. It was a pretty quiet night. And I can tell you that

Israelis have learned to take threats by Iranian leaders with a heavy dose of salt. Now, that's not to say that there would not be ramifications should the U.S. participate in this effort to dismantle Iran's nuclear program. There would undoubtedly be some ramifications. But I think that I would certainly take those threats with a certain dose of salt in order to ensure that we're not sort of blowing them out of proportion.

I also want to ask you now about leaders in the region, their response. Yesterday, King Abdullah of Jordan was speaking to the European Union, to the parliament, and he had this to say. With Israel's expansion of its offensive to include Iran, there is no telling where the boundaries of this battleground will end. And that, my friends, is a threat to people everywhere.

So at the same time, we're also seeing video of Jordan's air defenses mobilizing to shoot down Iranian weapons. Can you talk about this split that we're seeing in terms of how these nations are responding?

Look, we've heard a lot of condemnations over the past few days from Arab leaders who are essentially hedging their bets. They don't know exactly how this is going to end. And there's this longstanding practice of essentially criticizing pretty much anything Israel does. Secretly, however, there isn't a single rational leader in this region or indeed the world who isn't breathing a sigh of relief and thanking their lucky stars that Israel has done what it has done.

There's not a single country in this region that isn't safer off because of Israel's assault on Iran's nuclear program and its effort to essentially ensure that the country is defanged. Iran has proven a malign influence throughout this region and throughout the

world. And there are many, many individuals and many leaders in this region who are indeed sending messages to that effect and indeed participating in Israel's defense as it engages in this war for its self-defense and survival.

Avi, I think that Israel has been very forceful and direct about what it is trying to do. As you said, dismantle this nuclear program. We're hearing also this idea of regime change. But have they laid out their vision for what victory even looks like? Here's what Israel's president said this week.

After all, the Iranian people have been oppressed for decades and we all believe they're fed up and it is their chance to rise and change the regime. But it's not one of our objectives per se. That per se kind of doing a lot of heavy lifting there. So what exactly would be considered a victory in this scenario?

Well, I think it's actually been stated fairly clearly, both by President Herzog and by other Israeli leaders. The goal here is to remove the threat of annihilation from the state of Israel. It's as simple as that. That is what Iran poses, the current regime poses to the state of Israel. They've said so very openly that they would like to wipe Israel off the map. We know that they have been

developing a military nuclear program for decades now. This is an open secret. No one seriously doubts that. - And Avi, can I interrupt you for a second? I just wanna make sure I'm understanding the answer here. So is it that regime change, this Ayatollah gone, this entire government gone? Is it Fordow being completely destroyed? I think people are wanting to know the answer because it certainly determines the length of involvement.

Look, I don't think that Israelis care very much about who leads Iran. That's certainly for the Iranian people to decide for themselves. Israelis are mostly concerned for their own safety and their own survival. And so once that threat is removed, the dismantlement of the nuclear program, either by means of some kind of diplomatic effort or indeed through military action,

coupled with the removal of the threat posed by Iran's long-range missile program, I think that would be considered success and that would be considered the end of this effort from Israel's perspective. We've had sources telling CNN that Donald Trump is warming to the idea of U.S. military assets being used. What exactly is the request, do you think, from Israel's government that the U.S. could step in and change the trajectory of this conflict?

Look, Israel's longstanding doctrine has been that it can fight its wars for itself. It certainly appreciates the support in terms of resources, in terms of equipment that it receives from the United States and other countries. But at the end of the day, Israel knows how to fight its own wars. There is one element of this nuclear program, as you discussed earlier, the facility at Fordow, that is extremely difficult to hit.

by use of conventional weapons in Israel's possession, in which case it would be certainly useful, helpful for the U.S. to become involved. But we now know, based on reports this morning from the Wall Street Journal, that Israeli officials are saying that even that can effectively be targeted should Israel be given the time to do so. So, yes, of course, it would be helpful in many respects if the U.S. were to become involved. But if it came down to it, Israel can do this on its own as well. Avi Meir is founder of the Jerusalem Journal. Thank you.

And if you're just joining us, Iran's supreme leader addressing his nation just moments ago. He has a warning for President Trump. If the U.S. intervenes, there will be, quote, irreparable damage. He went on to say that Iran will never surrender or accept an imposed peace. And before we go, I want to call out the difference between that national intelligence director Tulsi Gabbard has said about Iran's nuclear ambitions versus that of her boss,

The IC continues to assess that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon, and Supreme Leader Khamenei has not authorized the nuclear weapons program that he suspended in 2003. The IC continues to monitor closely if Tehran decides to reauthorize its nuclear weapons program. Tulsi Gabbard has emerged that the intelligence community said Iran wasn't building a nuclear weapon. I don't care what she said. I think they were very close to having one.

It's notable because Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been sounding the alarm about Iran being on the brink of developing a nuclear weapon for years. It'll take them anywhere up to three years to cross all the nuclear technology threshold and then it takes about a year or two to weaponize. But this at most would give us five years. It could very well be next year. By next spring, at most by next summer, at current enrichment rates, they will have finished

the medium enrichment, and move on to the final stage. From there, it's only a few months, possibly a few weeks, before they get enough enriched uranium for the first bomb. -Okay, that was in 2012. Kim Dozier and Joel Rubin, I want to hear your final thoughts about what you're going to be listening for at least the rest of today. We won't even take on the rest of the week. -Yeah, Adi, I think we have to really see if the White House is willing to continue to give time to what we should call coercive diplomacy.

The Supreme Leader, as I mentioned a moment ago, might have signed his death warrant. That said, that doesn't mean we need to take military action and we can continue to watch Israel degrade Iran's defenses. Or are we going to just sort of go for it? And is the president, who's an impulsive decision maker, going to decide enough is enough?

I just want to go and drop this bomb and see what happens. Yeah, so he's been cautious about some decisions, as we heard earlier, about potentially taking out the Supreme Leader. Yes. Saying no to that. Kim, what are you going to be listening to? I'll be watching for Trump's tweets or truth posts this morning to see how he responds to the Supreme Leader. We might see at nightfall in Iran a decision to go ahead with a strike.

The risk is that Iran has somewhere between 700 to 1,200 missiles in reserve. Some of them, Iran alleges, are hypersonic missiles, hard to avoid, hard to shoot down. And those could be aimed at U.S. troops and Israeli populated areas and actually cause a lot more destruction than what we've seen so far.

Yeah, this is a very grim math that we're having to do in counting these weapons and understanding what's at stake in the region and beyond. I want to thank you guys for helping to guide me through this hour. Very helpful. And I want to thank you for waking up with us. As I said, CNN News Central starts and our breaking news coverage continues now.

This week on The Assignment with me, Adi Cornish. It's been about a full week of protests and demonstrations against the ongoing immigration raids in L.A. Leah Greenberg is a co-founder and co-executive director of the progressive group The Indivisible Project. We want people to bring their kids. We want people to bring their dogs. We want to create in these moments a sense of community and support and

How are they preparing? Are they changing their strategy in light of President Trump's willingness to use military force on U.S. soil? Listen to The Assignment with me, Adi Cornish, streaming now on your favorite podcast app.