US working on attack option with heaviest non-nuclear bomb
According to CNN sources, new US attacks on Iranian targets are being prepared, but no decision has been made.
Listen to this article
There is no audio version yet. Request one and an AI voice will read the article aloud.
Read by an AI voice.
.jpg){kind=link}
The US military has drawn up plans that could involve using the GBU-43/B, the heaviest non-nuclear bomb in the United States, against Iranian energy or nuclear facilities. Reuters could not independently verify the report, which CNN attributes to US officials.
CNN reports that military planners have prepared various options in case President Donald Trump orders new combat operations against Iran. One of those options would involve using the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb, popularly known as the ‘mother of all bombs’.
The report does not say that a decision has been made and gives no set time for an attack. According to Reuters, the US government is keeping all options open, while officials told CNN that military planning also covers scenarios that are ultimately not carried out.
Possible targets would include Iranian energy infrastructure and nuclear sites. According to CNN, there is doubt about the bomb’s military usefulness. It is very heavy and has a major surface impact, but that does not mean it can disable deeply buried or heavily fortified facilities.
Any possible use would nonetheless represent a clear escalation. The GBU-43/B has previously been used by the United States, but using it against Iran again would visibly expand the use of conventional US air-power assets in the conflict.
Washington says that Iran’s nuclear programme is central to US objectives. According to earlier reports, Tehran has put forward other priorities, including restoring shipping through the Strait of Hormuz. So far, the two sides have no publicly confirmed agreement on the terms for a political way out.
For European countries, the consequences for security, energy and shipping are particularly important. The Strait of Hormuz is a major route for oil, gas and other raw materials. New attacks could also increase the chance of retaliation against US or regional targets, although it has not been established that such a response will follow.
The available information largely comes from anonymous sources speaking about internal planning. It is therefore impossible to establish whether the option is being seriously considered politically, exists only as a theoretical scenario or has already been worked out in greater detail. The only certain news is that US planners have drawn up new options and that no decision to use them has been made.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- CNN reports possible US plans for new attacks on Iranian energy and nuclear targets.
- No decision to use the weapon has been confirmed.
- Reuters could not independently verify the report about the military option.
Left
Arguments New bombing raids increase the risk of civilian harm, regional escalation and further instability. From this perspective, diplomacy, international inspections and agreements on shipping should take precedence over military pressure.
Values International law, civilian protection, de-escalation and diplomacy.
Consequences An attack could trigger retaliation, raise energy prices and make negotiations more difficult; restraint could reduce military pressure on Iran.
Centre
Arguments The government must be prepared for security risks, but should use a military option only after a clear legal and strategic assessment. The question is not only whether a target can be hit, but also what follows afterwards.
Values Proportionality, accountable decision-making, the security of allies and feasibility.
Consequences More time for diplomacy limits immediate escalation, while keeping military options open could continue to serve as a deterrent.
Right
Arguments Iran must not develop a nuclear weapon, and threats to shipping or allies must not go unanswered. From this perspective, a credible military option may be necessary to restore deterrence.
Values National security, deterrence, protection of allies and order.
Consequences A forceful attack could weaken Iranian capabilities, but could also cause a wider war and prolonged US involvement.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The text sticks to what Reuters and CNN have reported about anonymous sources and does not present the attack as an established fact. The uncertainty over verification, decision-making and military effectiveness is explicitly included.
- uncertain US planners have drawn up options that could involve using the GBU-43/B against Iranian targets. — CNN reports this on the basis of US officials; Reuters could not independently verify it. source
- confirmed There is no confirmed decision or time for its use. — The reporting describes plans and options, not an order that has been given. source
- confirmed The GBU-43/B is the heaviest non-nuclear bomb in the US. — This description appears in the Reuters and CNN reports. source
Editor's note
The existence of new US attack options was reported by Reuters on the basis of CNN, but Reuters could not independently verify it. There is no confirmation of a presidential order, an attack time or the actual use of the bomb.Sources
More on this in Dutch media
- AD — „verenigde staten”
- de Volkskrant — „verenigde staten”
- RTL Nieuws — „verenigde staten”