Breaking News: Israel Hits Iran with Targeted Airstrikes

The Context and Rationale Behind the Strikes

Shapiro opened the discussion by outlining the long-standing threat posed by Iran’s nuclear ambitions. For years, Iran has been on the verge of developing nuclear weapons, with reports indicating that it had amassed enough highly enriched uranium—up to 60% enrichment at its Fordow facility—to produce multiple nuclear bombs. The International Atomic Energy Agency had repeatedly confirmed Iran’s violations of its nuclear obligations, despite the 2015 nuclear deal that the Trump administration withdrew from. Intelligence assessments and Iranian admissions suggested that Tehran was advancing its nuclear program with the explicit goal of regional dominance and the potential annihilation of Israel.

Israel’s decision to strike was framed as a necessary act of self-defense against an existential threat. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a statement released shortly after the strikes, emphasized that Iran had produced enough enriched uranium for nine atomic bombs and was taking unprecedented steps toward weaponization. Netanyahu underscored the urgency, warning that Iran could produce a nuclear weapon within months to a year, which would pose a direct threat not only to Israel but to the entire region and beyond.

The Execution and Immediate Impact of the Operation

The airstrikes targeted multiple sites across Iran, including Tehran, Natanz, and Fordow, focusing on military assets, nuclear facilities, ballistic missile factories, and key personnel involved in Iran’s nuclear program. Videos and reports from Tehran showed significant explosions and damage, with some buildings completely collapsed. Israeli intelligence reportedly succeeded in eliminating a substantial portion of Iran’s top military brass, including the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), General Hussein Salami, and several senior nuclear scientists.

The operation, dubbed “Operation Rising Lion” by Israel, was described as the opening phase of a multi-day campaign. Israeli officials stressed that the strikes were not aimed at regime change but at neutralizing the immediate military and nuclear threats. The IDF spokesperson highlighted that the timing was critical, as Iran was rapidly approaching a “point of no return” in its nuclear development, and delaying action would only make future strikes more difficult and less effective.

Israeli Public Sentiment and Political Unity

Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett joined the podcast to provide perspective from within Israel. He described a nation on high alert, with sirens sounding across the country and citizens taking shelter in “mammads” (safe rooms). Bennett emphasized the near-unanimous consensus across the Israeli political spectrum that the strikes were necessary. Despite deep political divisions on many issues, the threat from Iran’s nuclear program united Israelis in support of decisive action.

Bennett also addressed concerns about the potential for a broader regional conflict, noting that while the operation would likely continue for some time, Israel’s formidable defense systems and military preparedness would mitigate the impact of any Iranian retaliation. He acknowledged the possibility of missile barrages and proxy attacks but expressed confidence in Israel’s ability to withstand and respond to such threats.

The Role of the United States and International Dynamics

The podcast delved into the complex relationship between Israel and the United States regarding the strikes. Official U.S. statements, including from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, emphasized that Israel acted unilaterally and that the U.S. was not directly involved in the airstrikes. However, intelligence sharing and real-time reconnaissance support were reportedly provided to Israel, indicating a level of coordination behind the scenes.

Ben Shapiro and guests noted that while the U.S. maintains its own strategic interests in the region, it supports Israel’s right to self-defense. Senator Ted Cruz reinforced this stance, affirming America’s unwavering support for Israel and warning Iran against targeting U.S. forces in the region. Cruz highlighted the grave consequences Iran would face if it attacked American personnel, including the potential destruction of Iranian oil infrastructure and leadership.

The podcast also touched on the recent diplomatic efforts, including anticipated negotiations in Oman, which appeared to have collapsed amid Iran’s aggressive posture. The strikes were seen as a response to Iran’s refusal to dismantle its nuclear program despite diplomatic overtures and warnings.

On-the-Ground Perspectives and Regional Implications

Josh Hammer, reporting live from Israel, shared his firsthand experience of the tense atmosphere, describing how missile sirens and emergency protocols have become a routine part of life. He emphasized the relentless nature of Iranian-backed attacks on Israel, including missile barrages from proxies like the Houthis in Yemen. Hammer underscored the strategic importance of Israel’s actions, not only for its own security but for the stability of the broader Middle East.

Amit Seel, a prominent Israeli journalist, provided detailed analysis of the military operation’s phases and the strategic calculations behind the timing. He explained that the strikes followed a deception campaign designed to mislead Iranian leadership and that the elimination of senior Iranian figures was a significant blow to Tehran’s military capabilities. Seel also noted that while Iran’s missile arsenal remains a threat, Israel’s advanced defense systems and U.S. support would help mitigate the impact of any retaliatory attacks.

The podcast highlighted that many Arab states, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain, Egypt, and Jordan, while publicly cautious, privately welcome Israel’s actions against Iran, viewing Tehran as a common threat. This tacit regional alignment underscores the shifting geopolitical landscape in the Middle East.

The Broader Strategic and Moral Dimensions

Throughout the discussion, Ben Shapiro and his guests framed Israel’s strikes as a morally justified and strategically necessary act to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran from threatening global security. The operation was portrayed as a continuation of Israel’s historical precedent of preemptive strikes against nuclear threats, referencing past actions against Iraq’s Osirak reactor in 1981 and Syria’s nuclear facilities in 2007.

The podcast emphasized the existential nature of the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear ambitions, with the potential for catastrophic consequences if left unchecked. The consensus among Israeli leadership and U.S. allies is that diplomacy had failed and that military action was the only viable option to prevent a nuclear holocaust.