President Trump has the whole world’s eyes on him.

In the last 72 hours, both Israel and Iran have been waiting on a decision by President Trump whether he will drop heavy bombs on Iran’s Fordow nuclear site.

However, top Pentagon defense officials say Trump has delayed his decision because he is not fully convinced that the United States’ “Bunker Buster” will get the job done.

The Guardian had these key details to report:

Donald Trump has suggested to defense officials it would make sense for the US to launch strikes against Iran only if the so-called “bunker buster” bomb was guaranteed to destroy the critical uranium enrichment facility at Fordow, according to people familiar with the deliberations.

ADVERTISEMENT

Trump was told that dropping the GBU-57s, a 13.6-tonne (30,000lb) bomb would effectively eliminate Fordow but he does not appear to be fully convinced, the people said, and has held off authorizing strikes as he also awaits the possibility that the threat of US involvement would lead Iran to talks.

The effectiveness of GBU-57s has been a topic of deep contention at the Pentagon since the start of Trump’s term, according to two defense officials who were briefed that perhaps only a tactical nuclear weapon could be capable of destroying Fordow because of how deeply it is buried.

Trump is not considering using a tactical nuclear weapon on Fordow and the possibility was not briefed by defense secretary Pete Hegseth and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff Gen Dan Caine in meetings in the White House situation room, two people familiar with the matter said.

But the defense officials who received the briefing were told that using conventional bombs, even as part of a wider strike package of several GBU-57s, would not penetrate deep enough underground and that it would only do enough damage to collapse tunnels and bury it under rubble.

Those in the briefing heard that completely destroying Fordow, which Israeli intelligence estimates to go down as far as 300ft (90 metres), would require the US to soften the ground with conventional bombs and then ultimately drop a tactical nuclear bomb from a B2 bomber to wipe out the entire facility, a scenario Trump is not considering.

Trump has 'DOUBTS' on whether US 'bunker busters' would destroy Iran’s nuke sites — Axios

'We're going to be ready to strike Iran… but I think president's just not convinced we are needed yet' a US official tells outlet pic.twitter.com/jyFhCVVa8G

— RT (@RT_com) June 19, 2025

Trump has reason to hesitate to drop “bunker busters” on Fordow.

If the U.S. is unsuccessful, then it could lead to U.S. troops being deployed in special operations to finish the job in Fordow.

"It's never been used in anger and nobody really knows how far it can penetrate.”

Trump could use The GBU-57 bunker buster to devastate Iran’s nuclear sites, its effectiveness isn’t “guaranteed”, says director of military services at RUSI @MTSavill.@KaitBorsay | #TimesRadio pic.twitter.com/mnFiQmK5QQ

— Times Radio (@TimesRadio) June 19, 2025

Trump supporters are divided on the issue of whether the U.S. should get involved in Iran.

Per The Hill:

The New York Times and Axios reported Tuesday that Trump is seriously considering trying to take out the Fordow nuclear site.

ADVERTISEMENT

Some of Trump’s most ardent supporters, though, are warning against getting directly involved in the conflict at all. The worst-case scenario to them is a repeat of past U.S. posture in neighboring Iraq, where U.S.-driven regime change spurred by concerns over weapons of mass destruction turned into a failed nation-building exercise that thrust the region into a period of instability, giving rise to terrorist groups like the Islamic State group, commonly known as ISIS.

Asked about the arguments that the U.S. should use its capabilities to bomb the Fordow site, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) — who has been one of the loudest Republican voices advocating against U.S. involvement in Iran — reiterated her position.

“My office has been monitoring calls from constituents in my district and they overwhelmingly support my stance on staying out of this conflict and foreign wars,” Greene said in a statement. “Getting involved in another conflict won’t bring down gas prices, lower grocery bills, or make rent more affordable. Me and my district support President Trump and his MAGA agenda, it’s what we voted for in November, and foreign wars weren’t a part of it.”

Conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, a major figure in MAGA World who is close with Trump, was more explicit in his warning.

“America bombing Iran would be a direct escalation. Now, it would not be the same as bombing their oil fields, or even bombing the supreme leader. The most basic action would be, drop a bunker buster on their underground nuclear plant — and some claim that’s the only thing we have to do,” Kirk said.

“I’ll say this to anyone that will listen: It’s very hard to stop a war when you want, and it’s hard to stop a war once you’re in the midst of a war,” Kirk said. “If we were to bomb Fordow, Iran would likely and probably consider this to be an act of war. Would they respond and try to target U.S. bases? Would they try and target U.S. troops? Would they activate sleeper cells within the interior of the United States?”

Fueling the fears of the MAGA doves, some more hawkish Republicans have broached the subject of regime change — taking out Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei — while talking about the prospect of assisting Israel in bombing Iran.