After U.S. airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear sites, President Trump claimed a sweeping success—declaring the targets “completely obliterated.” But a leaked U.S. Central Command report now contradicts that, revealing the strikes only caused limited damage and set Iran’s nuclear ambitions back by months, not years.

Trump had praised the mission targeting Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordow using submarines and B-2 bombers with 30,000-pound bombs. Yet, leaked intelligence suggested Iran had moved key uranium stockpiles beforehand, minimizing losses.

The White House fired back, calling the leak an attack on Trump’s credibility. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt insisted the bombs “obliterated” their targets, echoing Trump’s uncompromising stance. But military leaders, like General Dan Caine, were more cautious—saying it would take time to assess full damage.

The leak reignited tensions in Washington. Democrats demanded transparency, while Republicans blamed a “deep state” smear. The episode also raises global concerns: if Iran retained enough enriched uranium, a nuclear weapon may be months away.

Lesson: In high-stakes diplomacy and warfare, exaggerating victories can damage credibility. Trust in leadership relies not on optics, but on honesty—even when the truth is complex.