Trump administration challenges initial damage assessments from Iran strikes

The report of a leaked Defense Intelligence Agency is suspected on the claim of President Donald Trump that the recent US air strikes “three Iranian nuclear facilities are completely and completely destroyed” completely and completely, instead the mission finished Iran’s program in only several months.

The report published by CNN and The New York Times, Trump, came only a few days after the approval of Trump amidst increasing tension between Israel and Iran. In a national address immediately after the operation, Trump “completely and completely slant the sites.”

While members of the Trump administration have launched a new war to discredit the preliminary report of the Pentagon’s defense intelligence agency, many experts told Fox News Digital that there is very little information available now to determine how much the strike has done.

A complete intelligence assessment is complex and time -taking, he said.

The FBI investigated Iran strike leaker, Lewit says: ‘They should be held accountable’

Dan Shapiro, who served as the first Middle East, as Deputy Assistant Secretary and US Ambassador to Israel, stated that he did not put too much stock in both a highly pessimistic or highly optimistic evaluation, and said the initial assessment from the DIA was based only on satellite imagination.

Shapiro, a senior partner of the Atlantic Council, told Fox News Digital, “This is a piece of puzzle how you will actually evaluate this.” “You are really to visit signal intelligence, human intelligence, other forms of site monitoring, potentially visits by inspectors of the International Nuclear Energy Agency, to visit the potentially visits by others, which are going to take days for the week to get real assessment.”

“But I think it is likely that if performed as expected, it was a significant loss, and will set the program quite back,” Shapiro said.

Joint Chief of Staff Chairman General Dan Kane said on Sunday that the initial war damage assessment suggested “all three sites maintained severe damage and destruction,” but admitted that a final assessment would “take some time”.

Nevertheless, media reports portrayed a separate picture based on the DIA report, and CNN reporting on the initial report stated that the Stash of Iran’s rich uranium was not destroyed in the strike, which was cited by seven people, who were informed in the report. According to CNN, the findings were based on assessment of war damage from the US Central Command.

Other members of the Trump administration, including the Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, later pushed back to the findings of the DIA report, claiming that the report was called “low confidence”.

Trump slammed Iran with nuclear weapons, Russia’s sudden threat to hand: ‘This is why Putin’s boss’

According to experts, the term is commonly used when labeled the initial assessment, and means that conclusions are limited based on figures.

Navy’s rear adam retired as Director for Transnational Danger at the National Security Council for former President Bill Clinton.

“Less confidence means that analyst is not sure of his assessment accuracy,” Montgomery said, now, a senior companion of the Washington Think Tank, the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy. “This occurs continuously when with a quick look with such a 24-hour evaluation.”

Montgomery associates, Craig Singleton, Foundation for Defense of Democracy with a senior partner, said that low trust label is used in cases with thin evidence and serves as a warning to policy-makers to get additional information.

“Most importantly, low confidence assessments are usually released when the major facts have not yet been verified, which is definitely applicable in this case,” Singleton said.

Rob Greenway, former Deputy Assistant to the President at Trump’s National Security Council, told Fox News Digital that it would take a month or two to get more intensive evaluation with high confidence.

Irani repeats nuclear facilities despite the comments of Foreign Minister Ayatollah.

Greenway also stated that the strike was designed for underground damage, which would complicate the assessment of damage, as it is not immediately available and many sources of intelligence such as signs or human intelligence would be required to conclude.

Greenway stated that Israel had earlier also operated a strike targeting sites, in which the web of analysis should be added.

Greenway, director of the Elisen Center for National Security at the Heritage Foundation, Greenway said, “Each of these is a very large puzzle, and you are trying to reduce the ultimate effect of the entireness of the puzzle, not just a special strike.” “This means that it is going to take time to do it.”

Nevertheless, Greenway said that the amount of ordnance fell on the sites-including more than 14,000 lb. Bomb -Bomb means that the targeted facilities have been compromised so heavy that they are no longer serving.

Greenway said, “We were putting double the age at the age required to achieve the desired effect, just to ensure that we don’t have to go back.”

East-clinton official appreciated Trump’s ‘courageous’ Iran Call, Suspect Herris had nerve

Greenway said, “There is no mathematical probability in fact, in which either the feature can be used again for the purpose Iran, if all again mean that everything is now within Israel’s ability now if necessary if necessary, to strike,” Greenway said.

And Michael Alan, senior director of a former National Security Council in George W Bush Administration, said that even though a final decision of the intelligence community will not be ready soon, the intelligence picture will become “rich” in the coming days.

Alan, managing director of the advisory firm Beacon Global Stratezes, said, “The goods are coming in, and we are collecting it, and they are trying to host it at the White House as soon as possible.”

White House press secretary Karolin Lewit told reporters that very few people had access to this report, and those who leaked it in the media would be held accountable as the FBI investigated who shared the document with the press.

“That person was irresponsible with it,” Levitt told reporters on Thursday. “And we need to get to the bottom of it. And we need to strengthen that process to protect our national security and protect the American public.”