President Donald Trump is weighing targeted military strikes on Iran aimed at damaging its nuclear and missile facilities, but he has not clearly articulated what strategic outcome he seeks. While he has said he will never allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, officials say Tehran has already claimed it does not intend to build one, even as it continues uranium enrichment. Administration officials argue that limited strikes could pressure Iran into negotiations, though critics question whether such action would achieve lasting concessions.

Military leaders have warned that even a limited strike could trigger significant retaliation against American forces in the region and strain available weapons stockpiles. Iran has dispersed parts of its missile program, making it harder to eliminate, and analysts caution that any attack could harden Tehran’s position rather than force compromise. Some intelligence assessments suggest Iran or its regional allies could respond with attacks on American targets.

Inside the administration, debate continues over whether to pursue a limited strike focused on nuclear and missile sites or a broader campaign aimed at destabilizing the Iranian government. Pentagon officials have indicated that current forces in the region could sustain only a short bombing effort. Critics in Congress argue that the president has not made a clear case for military action or sought authorization, raising concerns that strikes would serve more symbolic or political purposes than strategic ones.