Hegseth Defends Iran Strikes Amid Doubts Over Impact, Clashes with Media.

 Hegseth Defends Iran Strikes Amid Doubts Over Impact, Clashes with Media

WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Gen. Dan Caine addressed reporters Thursday morning in an attempt to defend the recent airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. But while they touted the mission’s success, lingering questions remain about the actual damage inflicted.

The briefing came in the wake of a leaked intelligence report suggesting the strikes may have only set Iran’s nuclear program back by a few months. That report has sparked debate in Washington and raised concerns among national security experts about whether the operation achieved its stated objectives.

President Donald Trump has called the strikes “devastating,” dismissing the leaked assessment and declaring the Iranian nuclear program “completely and fully obliterated.” He also lashed out at critics, calling any skepticism “unpatriotic” and claiming it disrespects the military pilots who carried out the bombing.

Trump doubled down on social media, praising the Pentagon news conference as “one of the greatest, most professional, and most ‘confirming’” he’d seen. He also attacked the press, calling for firings over what he labeled a “Witch Hunt” and demanding apologies to U.S. service members.

The president further claimed that Iran had not managed to relocate nuclear materials before the strikes, writing online: “Would take too long, too dangerous, and very heavy and hard to move!”

At the Pentagon briefing, Hegseth echoed the president’s frustration with the media, accusing journalists of rushing to judgment based on incomplete intelligence. He called the leaked report preliminary and criticized coverage that questioned the effectiveness of the mission.

In a tense exchange, Hegseth singled out Fox News national security correspondent Jennifer Griffin—his former colleague—accusing her of consistently misrepresenting the president’s remarks. Griffin pushed back, saying, “I take issue with that,” and stood by her reporting.

Griffin had asked whether U.S. intelligence could confirm that enriched uranium was present at the Iranian mountain facility targeted in the strike, especially after satellite imagery showed heavy vehicle activity at the site just days before the bombing.

Hegseth insisted there was no indication that Iran had moved any materials in advance, saying, “I’m not aware of any intelligence that I’ve reviewed that says things were not where they were supposed to be — moved or otherwise.”

Despite the heated rhetoric, the Pentagon offered few specifics about the long-term impact of the strikes. Military officials acknowledged it will take time to assess the full scope of the damage, and many questions remain unanswered—including whether Iran can quickly restore its nuclear capabilities or if it had already safeguarded key materials.

Lawmakers are set to receive classified briefings on the operation in the coming days, though the White House is reportedly restricting access to sensitive intelligence after this week’s leak.

For now, the administration remains firm in its messaging—but the absence of clear, verifiable evidence of a major setback to Iran’s nuclear efforts is fueling continued debate over what, exactly, the U.S. accomplished.