The White House has rejected a report by The Guardian suggesting uncertainty at the Pentagon over the effectiveness of conventional "bunker buster" bombs against Iran's fortified Fordow nuclear site, maintaining that all options — including tactical nuclear weapons — remain under consideration by President Donald Trump.
The White House on Wednesday disputed claims published by The Guardian, which alleged Trump was hesitating over a potential strike on Iran's Fordow uranium enrichment plant due to doubts at the Pentagon regarding the efficacy of conventional bunker-buster bombs.
Jacqui Heinrich, senior White House correspondent for Fox News, countered the Guardian report, citing direct communication with White House officials.
"To be clear, that is not at all what I was told," Heinrich wrote on X.
"The White House refuted a Guardian report claiming that the Pentagon's assessment of bunker busters was mixed, that only a tactical nuke would be a sure thing, and that POTUS was not considering using one and no option for a tactical nuke had been presented to him."
According to Heinrich, White House officials emphatically stated that "none of that report is true," emphasizing that "the military is confident bunker busters can complete the job, and NO OPTIONS have been taken off the table."
The Guardian had earlier reported that Trump discussed with defense officials the necessity of certain success before authorizing military action against Fordow. The site, embedded in mountainous terrain, is a critical component of Iran's nuclear infrastructure.
The Guardian cited unnamed sources familiar with internal deliberations, asserting that Trump was informed that the massive GBU-57 bombs — 30,000-pound bunker busters — would effectively destroy Fordow.
The report also suggested, however, that Trump remained unconvinced.
Two defense officials reportedly told The Guardian that debates at the Pentagon had persisted since Trump's presidency began, suggesting the depth of the Fordow plant posed doubts over whether conventional weaponry alone could guarantee total destruction. Some speculated that tactical nuclear weapons might be required due to the site's extensive fortification and depth.
But Heinrich's report presented a stark contradiction to this narrative, citing a White House official who categorically dismissed the notion of uncertainty regarding the conventional arsenal's capabilities.
Heinrich wrote, "A White House official tells me the contents of this report are false – that the US military has no doubt about the efficacy of bunker busters in eliminating the site at Fordow, also denying that any options (including tactical nukes) have been taken off the table."
Jim Thomas ✉
Jim Thomas is a writer based in Indiana. He holds a bachelor's degree in Political Science, a law degree from U.I.C. Law School, and has practiced law for more than 20 years.
© 2025 Newsmax. All rights reserved.