US Mobilises as Strike Looms Over Iran Nuclear Sites

Arabian Post Staff -Dubai

Senior officials in Washington have quietly activated contingency plans for military strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities, marking a dramatic shift in US posture amid escalating Israeli–Iranian hostilities. According to multiple reports, including Bloomberg and Reuters, the White House and Defence Department are preparing the operational infrastructure needed to engage Tehran directly.

President Donald Trump, speaking on 18 June outside the White House, offered only ambiguity: “I may do it. I may not do it… nobody knows what I’m going to do.” Meanwhile, senior US generals, defence secretaries and intelligence chiefs are said to be readying federal agencies for a possible weekend strike. Forces in the Middle East have been repositioned; aircraft and ships have been moved from bases such as Al‑Udeid in Qatar and Bahrain’s Fifth Fleet port to reduce vulnerabilities.

Sources indicate that the primary target could be Iran’s underground Fordow uranium enrichment plant — a hardened bunker facility situated within a mountain and long deemed beyond Israel’s military reach without US bunker‑busting capacity. With Israel continuing airstrikes on Iran as part of ‘Operation Rising Lion’, analysts assess that a US strike would dramatically escalate the conflict.

Within the White House, debate is intensifying. The New York Times and Washington Post report that Trump, influenced by hawkish advisors such as Senator Lindsey Graham and defence chiefs, has signed off on strike plans but is awaiting final approval. His delay aims to allow Iran a final diplomatic window — offering a chance to curb uranium enrichment before force is used.

Opposition persists even within Trump’s own camp. A divide between hawks, advocating for decisive action, and MAGA-aligned isolationists, including Vice President Vance and media figure Tucker Carlson, highlights the internal tug-of-war shaping presidential decision‑making. Trump has underscored this dynamic: advisors like Gen. Dan Caine and CIA Director John Ratcliffe have pressed for a more aggressive stance, while isolationists urge restraint.

Politically, the administration faces calls for a formal congressional mandate. Critics argue the Constitution requires authorisation for military action beyond self‑defence; proponents counter the urgency of neutralising Iran’s perceived nuclear threat demands swift action.

Diplomacy continues in parallel. The UK, France and Germany are convening in Geneva to press Iran on de-escalation — a track the US has distanced itself from. Tehran has responded with warnings to Washington, promising strong retaliation if US forces become involved.

Markets have reacted with caution. Observers note fears of a broader Middle East conflict, amplified oil price volatility, and rising inflationary risks tied to increased military spending. Central banks, notably the Federal Reserve and Bank of England, must weigh geopolitical shocks alongside inflation outlooks.

On the ground, Israeli airstrikes have continued across Iran, targeting nuclear infrastructure including Arak and Natanz, with over 1,100 sites reportedly struck since mid‑June. Iran has launched multiple missile barrages at Israeli territory; civilian casualties are said to be in the hundreds on both sides.

The timing of any US strike remains uncertain. Sources cite a possible weekend window, with final orders likely to be issued at the last moment. Pentagon leadership, including SecDef Hegseth and Gen. Caine, are expected to have operational control, while the president retains final authority.

As conflicting pressures swirl — military readiness, strategic diplomacy, domestic political debates — all eyes are on whether President Trump will strike at Iran’s underground sites or continue hedging amid rising global risk.