To determine whether a large-scale assault was advisable, President Trump called his intelligence director into the Oval Office just days before the outbreak of the February conflict with Iran, The Wall Street Journal reported. Senior officials, alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, advised the president that the Iranian regime had reached an unprecedented level of weakness. They framed the situation as a distinct opening for Trump to cement a legacy as a global peacemaker by dismantling Tehran's nuclear infrastructure, leaving only doubts regarding the effectiveness of a massive strike in toppling the government.
Tulsi Gabbard, serving as Director of National Intelligence at the time, briefed the president on the prevailing conclusions of the American intelligence community. People familiar with the exchange noted her warning that the assassination of Iran's supreme leader would probably install an even more radical administration determined to secure nuclear weapons. Furthermore, Tehran would destabilize worldwide energy markets by swiftly sealing off the Strait of Hormuz. She also predicted military retaliation against Middle Eastern partners and US troops, which would spark concerns over American reliability among allied nations. Trump received similar cautionary advice from numerous other sources, the publication noted. Senior commanders informed the president that a military campaign would result in significant casualties, deplete munitions stockpiles, and create readiness challenges for an already overtaxed fighting force.
An invasion was initiated by Trump on Feb. 28, accompanied by a call for the Iranian public to overthrow their leadership. Although the president initially guaranteed a six-week timeline for victory, the conflict stretches on nearly half a year later with no clear conclusion in sight. Commercial shipping in the strait continues to face fire from Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which maintains total control over the nation. Under the rule of Mojtaba Khamenei – who assumed the role of supreme leader following his father's death – the government has demonstrated no willingness to yield. This stalemate has prompted Trump to weigh the possibility of claiming victory simply for the reopening of the waterway, absent any nuclear accord, the newspaper highlighted.
The president is presently depending on endless blockades wearing down American forces alongside crushing financial sanctions to devastate the Iranian economy, adopting a strategy of attrition that he insists will bring the regime to its knees. The Pentagon has tallied 756 wounded American servicemembers, alongside combat-related deaths of 18 US troops and approximately 3,000 Iranians. The conflict has also resulted in depleted petroleum reserves, diminished weapons stockpiles, and damaged American military outposts. Looking ahead to the midterm elections, the war is severely damaging Republican chances while driving Trump's approval ratings to their lowest point yet.
Securing a deal that permanently restricts Iran's nuclear ambitions and solidifies Trump's image as a historic wartime leader remains highly improbable, according to several former national security and White House officials, the outlet found. Eric Brewer, a Nuclear Threat Initiative deputy vice president with experience in both Democratic and Republican administrations, told The Wall Street Journal, "This was all predictable and predicted." Brewer elaborated, "You can draw a straight line from the fact that the war was launched without any clear political objective to the mishandled diplomacy in trying to end it."
Trump has successfully devastated Iran's military and nuclear sites and is now positioning to cripple the nation's economy through sanctions and a naval blockade, White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales emphasized in a statement. Wales said, "He will never allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon." She further cautioned, "It would be wise for Iran to reach a deal. Otherwise, they know what could happen." US officials revealed that early in the year, Trump was looking for a fresh arena to project American dominance, having previously executed a January raid to apprehend Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro and a June 2025 strike targeting three Iranian nuclear complexes.
Netanyahu put forward Iran as the ideal theater for Washington's next move, the paper confirmed. However, the push for conflict faced resistance from certain corners. Vice President JD Vance advocated a far more conservative path, officials disclosed. He advised the president that negotiations could still result in Iran abandoning its nuclear program. Pursuing a diplomatic resolution carried inherent risks but remained far less damaging than the unpredictable consequences of full-scale war, particularly given that harsh US sanctions were already crushing the Iranian economy. Should diplomacy fail, Vance reasoned, Trump would possess a much stronger mandate to launch a devastating and rapid assault against Iran.
The president entertained the alternative view but was ultimately swayed by presentations from the Pentagon outlining "decisive" options, US officials noted. Adm. Brad Cooper of US Central Command, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine provided the president with multiple briefings detailing strikes against Iranian assets, encompassing warships, mine-storage sites, weapons-production centers, radar networks, and missile launchers. The core objective was to cripple the Islamic Republic and overwhelm its military capabilities while Israel eliminated the uppermost echelon of Iranian leadership.
Trump repeatedly brushed aside the reservations expressed by top national security officials during these discussions, expressing confidence that the military would organically resolve any complications. Officials present at the briefings recalled that Caine and Hegseth continuously promised they would manage whatever difficulties emerged.
Trump is supplied with accurate and impartial data by the Pentagon to enable sound decision-making, a White House official stated. A representative for Caine refused to provide comment. Central Command deflected inquiries to the defense secretary's office, which ignored requests for a response, the publication reported. After the war began on Feb. 28, Steve Witkoff, a primary envoy for Iran, and Central Intelligence Agency Director John Ratcliffe interrupted a Mar-a-Lago fundraiser to alert Trump that Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei had been killed by Israel. The ecstatic president ordered the pair to announce the development to the assembled crowd.
The announcement triggered massive applause throughout the room. People familiar with the scene recounted how Trump crossed his arms and visibly expanded his chest while absorbing the adulation of his supporters and aides. The CIA declined a request for comment.
The president's jubilant mood quickly evaporated. Questions mounted regarding the actual strategic value of the war as US forces suffered battlefield casualties alongside severe damage to bases and equipment, the journal recorded. The military hardships were further aggravated by chaos in the global energy markets. Fuel costs surged globally as Iran's blockade of the Strait of Hormuz abruptly halted a fifth of the world's gas and oil shipments.
Looking for a diplomatic exit strategy that would save face for all participants, multiple Gulf nation leaders – including officials from Qatar and Saudi Arabia – reached out to the White House. Concurrently, Republican politicians warned Trump that the ongoing conflict was actively harming the party's electoral prospects for November. Officials recalled that the widespread pushback left Trump privately enraged. He demanded that aides explain why the intense bombing campaign had failed to force an Iranian surrender.
After early diplomatic initiatives faltered, a temporary ceasefire was eventually reached. Military monitors noted that Iran utilized the lull in combat to seed the Strait of Hormuz with dozens of mines, although the explosives were contained within a narrow stretch of the waterway. The president remained deeply uncertain about the optimal course of action well into April. A visitor to the White House strongly advised Trump to conclude the hostilities. A source familiar with the exchange confirmed that Trump asked whether he should "bomb the s—" out of Iran. The confidant pushed back against the idea, warning that escalating the strikes would merely trap the US in a broader regional conflagration, the outlet detailed.
A major breakthrough materialized on June 17, taking the form of an interim peace accord designed to open the strait and facilitate a 60-day window for nuclear diplomacy. When questioned by close associates about his willingness to accept a temporary arrangement, the president referenced internal White House surveys showing that nearly 80% of the public favored any agreement that would stop the war, regardless of its specific details. Following the implementation of the June interim agreement, Tehran immediately resumed its attacks on maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz. Trump interpreted the renewed aggression as an outright betrayal.
The agonizing cycle soon repeated itself. Trump would proudly declare a breakthrough, only to watch the arrangement disintegrate shortly thereafter. He would subsequently threaten Iran to extract a surrender. While he occasionally made good on these threats, he would frequently retreat, claiming that fresh progress had been made toward a permanent treaty to eliminate Iran's nuclear capabilities. In late July, Trump commanded a massive military operation that he declared would exceed any offensive since World War II. He ultimately aborted the mission after regional partners begged him to prevent further escalation.
The 60-day framework for nuclear talks formally expired on Aug. 17. Three days later, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed that Trump had embraced a campaign of intense economic coercion intended to "collapse the regime" via a new initiative labeled Operation Economic Outcast, the report concluded. Six months after the onset of hostilities, the "regime change" talking point had returned.
