of course, we are in tandem, running a live page on the bbc website with plenty of reaction as we are getting it in. this is bbc news. this is bbc news. we begin with that breaking story coal the us has attacked iran. in the past hour, president trump posted on social media that the us carried out a very successful attack on three iranian nuclear sites, including the underground uranium enrichment facility at fordo. on the post, he said... he said in a post on truth

social that a full payload of bombs was dropped on the primary site, fordo, adding that all plans are safely on their way home. congratulations, he said, to our great american warriors. the president then posted another message from an open source intelligence account which said that fordo had gone. all of this comes just two days after mr trump said he would decide within two weeks whether to join key ally israel when it came to attacking iran, and earlier on saturday, as we have been reporting through the evening here, us b-2 bombers, which carry the so-called bunker buster bombs, were headed out of the united states, heading towards guam. first of all, let's get some reaction from israel. we understand that israel knew about the us's actions on this, and it was all done in co-ordination. let's go to our correspondent in tel aviv, mark

lowen. mark, this was as far as we understand a co-ordinated attack. yes, we have just seen a quote from an unnamed israeli official who has been speaking to the public broadcaster here in israel, who says we were in full co-ordination with the us on the latter's strike tonight on iran's nuclear facilities. that would come as no surprise, because of course the israelis have been pushing for days, since the start of this current campaign and for long before that, actually, for the americans to get militarily involved. it has been their intent to get the americans to send in the bunker busters into the sites that the israeli military could not reach, particularly fordo, that nuclear plant buried deep into the mountain. perhaps as many as 90 metres or 100m below ground. and it would require

the b-2 bombers carrying the 13.5 ton bombs to reach down and tunnelled down into that site. donald trump saying that fordo is gone. the question is, of course, whether that is a confirmation that they used those bombs. i would have thought that basically does mean that, and we saw the b-2 planes yesterday going to guam, the overseas territory in the western pacific, very far from iran, but a place from where they could launch those b-2 planes. also, i have to say, avoiding the kind of messy situation that there is in another launch site, diego garcia, which is an indian ocean site basically belongs still or is run by the united kingdom, so they could have been a difficult situation in getting approval from the uk to use that site. so it appears that the b-2 bombers will have taken off from guam. we don't have complete confirmation from that. and they will have dropped the bunker busters, if

indeed they did, on three iranian sites, natanz, which is one of the main enrichment sites, isfahan, and fordo. the question now is what the reaction will be from iran. this is a decisive, seismic moment in the war, in the relationship in the middle east, in the relationship between iran and israel, and of course, potentially carries huge implications for american security. there are 40,000 american troops stationed in this region. they will be on extremely high alert. yesterday already we had the houthis, the iran backed group in yemen, threatening that they would resume attacks on american ships in the red sea were the us to get militarily involved in iran. i think there will be now a huge fear of iranian retaliation on american military assets in the region, and of course how iran will retaliate towards israel.

mark lohan, thank you very much for the moment. i should just say that we are seeing reports on fox news which give us a bit more detail. of course they are reports on one us network, which is quite close to the trump administration. are saying that the us dropped six bunker buster bombs on fordo. so that's what fox news is saying. also, president trump has, we understand, spoken in a brief phone interview to the reuters news agency. they are saying that the president said this was an amazing success tonight. back to what we heard from fox news, as well, just on the number of missiles that were used, fox news reporting that america used 30 tomahawk missiles on other iranian nuclear sites. so, of course, lots coming in as we try and

react to that news that america has bombed iran. three nuclear sites in particular. let's ring in benham ben taleblu, who joins me in the studio, from the centre for defence of democracies. we heard from mark in israel. what reaction have we had from iran? you have had iranian officials softly confirm that the strike took place, try to find a space-saving line of retreat, talking about the potential diversion of that fissile material from the uranium enrichment facilities that have been struck. this is designed for them to save face before their own population as well as to raise the risks to the americans are potentially widening the war, moving from counter proliferation to counter regime change. but right now the regime is scrambling, its crown jewel has been targeted. you have had about a week of his rarely strikes going after ballistic missiles, launchers, military

nuclear facilities. the islamic republic of iran, make no mistake, is on its back, this is traditionally when they find a way to fight to live another day. and watching what comes out of iranian diplomacy, as much as what comes out of iranian military action here, will be equally as important. benham, thank you very much for the moment. we have had official acknowledgement of that bombing at the fordo nuclear site from an iranian official as well. a spokesperson from a crisis management centre saying a part of the fordo nuclear site area came under an aerial attack. that is according to a news agency. we have had the reaction from israel, and we have monitored the reaction from iran. now let's get the reaction year in the united states. president trump is due to speak to the nation in under an hour.

it is 9:07pm in america. president trump is saying that he will deliver that address at 10pm. i am joint by our north america correspondence, nomia iqbal. nomia, what has been the reaction along party lines? well, overall, in terms of the republican party, they are largely behind president trump, so lindsey graham, senator lindsey graham, we know that he has been very pro- the us joining israel, he is incredibly pro- israel, so he has put on social media tonight, on x, good, this is the right call, the regime deserves it. well done, president trump. we have the best air force in the world, it makes me so proud. fly, fight, win. there are similar sentiments from tom cotton, a very pro- trump republican,

saying that iran has waged a war of terror against the us for 46 years and saying that president trump made the right call. there is a lone voice, i would say, in the form of thomas massey, one of the most vocal ones pushing against american intervention in iran, and he has posted on x tonight at what president trump has done is unconstitutional. just worth noting massie wanted to introduce a war powers resolution in the house on tuesday which would basically prohibit american involvement in iran. so the constitution's article one, section eight, basically gives the power to declare war to congress, but the president also has war powers in the constitution, so those two articles have been this big source of constitutional debate. basically, massie's argument is if you want to bomb, you've got to get our approval, but we know historically that presidents have often ignored that, as is the case, donald trump has done that as well.

but as i say, the majority of the republican party are in support of what the president has done this evening. and nomia, i'm just seeing that john fetterman, democrat senator from pennsylvania, has written on x, as i have long maintained, this was the correct move by the president. iran is the world's leading sponsor of terrorism, he continues, and cannot have nuclear capabilities. nomia, what do you think public support would likely be over this? was there any polling done in the last couple of days, as the president was debating whether or not to get involved? there was some polling, and it suggested nearly half of americans did not want us to get involved in any of strikes on another country. i mean, we have been talking over the last few days about the split in donald trump's base, one of the many reasons, but a very significant

reason, why people voted for him was because of his no wars platform, his belief that the era of foreign intervention, to quote him, was over. so they couldn't understand why he would want to join in this, and there were concerns about it being prolonged into this sort of long war, potentially. i think donald trump's post, and we will hear more tonight suggesting that this was done, although we will see what happens from here. nearly half of americans were not in support. 25% from onepoll, i think it was done by the washington post, suggested that they were in support. and so we will see what the polling is like afterwards, but i do think president trump would have been aware just how deeply unpopular this was overall. not just with the american public but within his own base. as i said, there has been this split between the isolationists and the hawks of the party. and nomia, we have

had more reaction as well from the speaker of the house of representatives, michael johnson. yes, sorry, i am just seeing him now on social media. there are obviously lots of reactions coming in from lots of different members of the republican party, and the democrat party. but, yes, he is saying the military operations in iran should serve as a clear reminder to our adversaries and allies that president trump means what he says. the president gave iran's leader every opportunity to make a deal, but iran refused to commit to a nuclear disarmament agreement. he goes on to say that the president has been very consistent and clear that a nuclear armed iran will not be tolerated. president trump had talked a lot about negotiating with the iranians, that that was his preferred resolution. i don't know what happens after this. again, we will probably get more of an indication in his address to the nation. but earlier in the week, just two days ago, he had said that he did want to talk

to them, they wanted to come to the white house, which the iranians denied, but we'll see what happens here, if is, indeed, any room for negotiation. and nomia, i'm just going to keep you there for one second because just seeing reports from the white house that president trump has spoken to prime minister netanyahu after that us action, the white house just telling us that. they are, and it's not surprising, because both men have been in contact constantly. that was according to the prime minister, the israeli prime minister, who earlier in the week had gone down to the site of where an israeli hospital he said had been bombed by the iranians and said that he was very close to present trump. i mean, there is some speculation and some reporting that the men do disagree with each other on a lot of stuff, that the relationship isn't as perfect as it is claimed, but he did say that the president and him

were in touch all the time. so i don't think that's surprising that the israeli prime minister wants to emphasise that they were aware of what the us was doing. a washington correspondent nomia iqbal, thank you very much for your thoughts there. i am joined lives by colonel william dunn, a former us marine corps officer who flew combat missions across the middle east. thank you for joining us here in bbc news. we still don't have confirmation from the dod, as far as i know, about which planes were used in this, but it is widely thought that these were those b-2 planes which were capable of carrying those bunker busters. i just wanted to get your thoughts on that. well, thank you very much for having me, and yes, it does appear that if they did drop those bunker busters, as we like to call them, it would have been with the b-2 planes. the big message here, and hopefully the

iranians were listening, is that we can strike you anywhere, any time, anyplace, and i hope they understand that, this is probably our quickest path to peace in the region. and we're also reports on fox news that, hawks were also used. just remind viewers what tomahawk is and how that might have been part of trying to take out these nuclear facilities. well, tomahawk is a cruise missile that is going to be launched from various platforms. it can be launched from the sea and from some aircraft, and it is going to fly a very specific projected route into a target. they are very hard to stop, they are very hard to defend against. and they are what i consider a relatively low cost precision weapons. low-cost is relative, but they can strike targets pretty much anywhere in the world from our platforms and different methods. very accurate, very precise. the

absolute plan to reduce any civilian casualties by using those weapons. and in terms of how quickly they could have been scrambled, i mean, we were only hearing this evening that the b-2s had been moved from i think it was missouri, but you would know better than me, to guam. well, what it seems like they did, and this is very iconic method, we launch aircraft from many different directions in many different places. they may or may not end up in a target area. it's a way to help deceive our enemies. what the president did was a beautiful methodology, i thought, to choreograph and tell our adversaries exactly what was going to happen. he just didn't tell them when. he gave them every opportunity to off-ramp the situation, they chose not to. and the other story here, the iranian military needs to stand down. if they attack us forces, which they are capable of doing, they

can see, and i believe confidently that our president will protect our men and women that are overseas and deployed, and protect america as a whole and any americans abroad, so they should not attack any of our bases. ideally, this will get them to the peace table. and if not, more strikes can come. and if that happens, what do you think the next sort of military action could be from the us in terms of helping israel to retaliate? what i believe we will do - this was plans that i saw when i was still on active duty - is we will not attack any population centres. we are only going to attack what i call war supporting infrastructure. anything that will allow around to make war. what the iranian people should understand, and they have an opportunity here to help with, if you want to call it regime change are a better path, we could strike and israel could strike any

economic target at will. we don't want to do that, we don't want to cripple the iranian people. the iranian people should be seen as our friends. they may not believe that today, but hopefully in the future they will understand, and we used to be great friends with iran back in the day. so by removing, if you will, a regime that is promised to destroy america and promised to destroy israel, it may allow the iranian people to have and around that they can love and cherish and then become friends with the rest of the world. thank you for your thoughts, colonel william dunn, a former officer who flew combat missions across the middle east. if you're just joining us in bbc news, reminder of the news that we brought you a couple of hours ago, and that is that is that president trump has confirmed us military action in iran, saying that the us has attacked three nuclear sites in the country, including fordow,

natanz and isfahan. the president described those strikes as a very successful and said that a full payload of moms was dropped on fordow, which is around's main enrichment site. iranian state media says that part of the fordow site was attacked by enemy strikes. now, in about 40 minutes from now, president trump is due to make a televised address from the white house. that's 10pm local time here in washington, dc. we are hearing that iranian state tv or a commentator, i should say, on iranian state tv is saying that every american citizen or military in the region is now a legitimate target. i am going to bring in behnam ben taleblu from the

centre for the defence of democracy, and iran expert. that is a state commentator, not an official, but what would you read into that threat? it is akin to the threats that the islamic rep had been levying, at least on air, both with official and unofficial media, against the us in an attempt to deter an attack. we have seen iranian officials really talk about the potential for to widen if america was going to be going after the fordow fuel enrichment plant, which is again the crown jewel of iran's nuclear facilities, and when you look at persian language social media and what pro- regime and pro-government sources are saying there, they are also promising to widen the war and intensify their operations against israel as well. we know that based on publicly reported numbers. less than 10% of iran's medium-range ballistic missiles, between 420 and 480 have been fired in the past week, less than 10% have landed, against israeli territory. essentially all civilian targets, so we are

likely going to see an intensification of the already widening israel iran war, and then the potential for iran to either via a proxy, using rockets or drones, at us bases in iraq or in the region, or potentially the statement of being a harbinger of a more direct attack from iranian territory, like we saw in january of 2020. behnam, a lot of our viewers will be deeply worried about what might come next. of us can ashley predict that. but in terms of who iran might have as an ally in the region, just take us through who might be supporting iran, just as we know, of course, the us has been very closely co-ordinating with israel. well, that is indeed the challenge and really the predicament that the islamic republic of iran put itself in. it has no state allies today, its sole ally in the arab world, the assad regime in syria, really felt late last winter as we saw with the rise

of the hts backed rebel officials. we have seen iran co-opt at the non- state-level and architecture of transnational terrorism, proxies, in places like iraq, syria, yemen, gaza and lebanon. but the israeli military campaign against those proxies, called the axis of resistance, has essentially neutered the long-range strike capabilities in the political infrastructure and the military capabilities of two of them that flank israel, hezbollah in lebanon on and hamas in gaza. that leaves the houthis, which the us battled in yemen, and the long-range bases in iraq, which have attacked us bases as well as those on the border in syria. these two do not have the political wherewithal to enter at the same level that the state of the islamic republic of iran has, but if you are looking abroad, those are the islamic revolutionary guard corps, which sits at the core of the resistance, and that was who willow -- who they

will be looking into. looking at the diplomacy living up to the us strikes, our partners cbs news in america are saying that the us reached out to iran somatically on saturday to say that the strikes are all it plans to do and that, i quote, regime change efforts are not planned. your reaction to that? well, one, it's quite clear that president trump or at least what president trump has been saying and signalling in public is greatly believed to be and now known to be the same thing that he is signalling and saying in private, meaning the president has not been interested in regime change operations this entire time. yes, he was critical of the obama era nuclear deal, but he wanted a drastically different one, a better one, he wanted his own. he was unable to get that with the iranians in his first term, he was unable to get that within the 60 day window he gave the iranians in his second term. now, how much of this message that he has committed to the iranians inprivate, how much of that has

filtered through the lens of the islamic republic's revolutionary ideology, the lack of willingness to trust and message from america, vertically from president trump, who they have particular enmity with from term one, how much of that will be filtered, rains be seen. particularly if iran's ageing supreme leader, now believed to be in a bunker somewhere, tweeting a few hours ago about the defence of palestine, for instance, how much of his desire and his enmity and his personal hatred now sees this is not a counter proliferation operation but as a regime change operation, and if the islamic republic ignores it, how might it go about responding? one more question for you, if i may, as someone who watches around very closely. what do you think the iranian people are likely to be thinking about this, and those calls from some quarters for regime change? because we know amongst many people they are unpopular. yes, the government of the islamic republic of iran is drastically unpopular on the iranian streets. we have seen room and bust cycles of anti- regime protest since 2017,

seeking wholesale change of the system. the iranian people have been unable to achieve that wholesale change in the system because they are outgunned by a much stronger national security state, but over the past 1.5 weeks they have seen the islamic republic's adverse areas, israel and america, who for a long time from the own bully pulpit have sent them weakening the missile infrastructure that the regime has built. this steals a real status blow to the regime, and i do worry, actually, about the population. not just because i am a iranian american, but because as the regime loses these capabilities due to defeats from abroad, it may turn around and crackdown and intensify that political pressure, that abuse of citizens, those human rights violations, at home. this is really the only way that the regime will again try to re- bolster its deterrents. and i fear right now that iran in 2025 could look like, if donald trump does not finish the job, if israel also shies away from

making larger counter regime operations, that iran in 2025 could look like iraq after 1991, where iraq did not have the capability to fight israel or america but what happened there was a totalitarian terror was locked in for a decade, that ultimately pulled in the us a decade later in the larger land war. thank you very much for all your contributions this evening. i understand that you have to leave us now, but thank you very much for sharing your insights. just a reminder, if you are just joining this rolling coverage on bbc news, that president trump has confirmed that the us has struck three nuclear sites in iran. fordow, natanz and isfahan. mr trump posting on social media that a full payload of bombs was dropped on the site of fordow. he said there is not another military in the world that could have done this. now, we understand that this was done in co-ordination with israel, who were aware of this

happening. iranian state media has confirmed those abstracts, saying that part of the fordow site was, i quote, attacks by enemies. in just over 30 minutes, the president is going to make a televised address to the nation from the white house. joining me now is colonel brendan kearney, the former chief of staff for the us marine corps forces. thank you very much for waiting patiently. it is good to talk to you on bbc news. what do you make of what we have heard so far about this military operation. well, it's not a surprise. we've been anticipating this for the last couple of days. certainly there has been open source reporting in terms of aircraft movement, aircraft carrier movement into the region, and president trump has been very frank with what he intended to do. he was trying to give peace a chance,

but seemingly some indicators have shown him that the chance is up. i am not surprised that all that this operation is ongoing. have you ever come into any sort of contact with the b-2 planes yourself? can you tell us more about if it is confirmed that they were used, just how they operate? well, most of the time they fly very, very long distances, and that's because they are an aircraft that needs very sophisticated maintenance. so you are looking at diego garcia, you are looking at an airfield in montana, barksdale air force base in louisiana. i have seen them operate. however, i was retiring just as they were coming into full operational capability. but i certainly know what aircraft like them, and b-52s, can do. i witness that myself and the first gulf war. and also reports on fox

news that tomahawk 's were used when it came to striking natanz and isfahan. so your thoughts on that? well, that's not unusual. the united states has a very sophisticated capability when it comes to cruise missiles, and we use them very successfully over the last number of years. they are a superb capability. there are not many countries that have anything even closely capable of doing what tomahawk can do. they are c launched, so they are very mobile, and i think it is all part and parcel to what is probably going to be a couple of days, if not a couple of weeks, of an aerial campaign that will be launched against the islamic republic -- sea-launched. do you think this is just the start, then, colonel? i do. i think we will get a little bit more out of the president in about half-an-hour. thank you so much for sharing your insights and expertise on this developing story. that is colonel brendan kearney, former chief of staff

for the us marine corps. it is 9:30pm here in washington, dc. not too far from the white house and in half-an-hour president trump will address the nation. it comes as he said a couple of hours ago that the us has bombed three nuclear site in any run. let's get more reaction with our north american correspondent. -- iran. and we will be hearing from tel aviv from our correspondent mark lowen. what reaction are we getting from israel? still the middle of the night here but we getting some lines. yoav