More Stories
With US military assets building up across the Middle East and Washington warning Tehran that “time is running out,” a former Israeli military spokesperson says US strikes on Iran now appear increasingly likely.
“I think it’s only a matter of time before the US will conduct strikes against the Islamic Republic,” Lt Col Jonathan Conricus said in an interview with Iran International's English podcast Eye for Iran.
President Donald Trump said this week that the United States was prepared to act with “speed and violence, if necessary,” while Iranian officials have threatened immediate retaliation.
Trump also suggested Friday that Tehran may ultimately seek negotiations rather than face American military action.
“I can say this, they do want to make a deal,” confirming that he had given Iran a deadline to enter talks without specifying what it was. “We have a large armada, flotilla, call it whatever you want, heading toward Iran right now,” he added.
'Almost everything is in place'
Conricus argued that the military tools required for meaningful action are already positioned.
“I think most of those capabilities and assets are in place and are ready to be deployed,” he said, adding: “Judging by the way things look now, almost everything is in place.”
He said the remaining question is timing—“the tactical operational opportunity” and political considerations around when to strike.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio also told lawmakers this week that the Islamic Republic is “probably weaker than it’s ever been."
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Friday that Tehran was ready for talks only “on an equal footing,” but stressed that Iran’s missile and defence capabilities would “never be subject to negotiation.”
What would strikes target?
Conricus told Iran International any US strikes would likely prioritize crippling the regime’s internal control and ability to sustain repression.
He suggested an initial focus on “command and control” and the Islamic Republic's capacity “to exercise power domestically,” including “specifically targeting IRGC and Basij, but not limited to that.”
He also flagged cyber and communications disruption, saying he would “assume cyber and communications warfare against the networks and the communications infrastructure of the regime.”
In addition, he said missile infrastructure would be central—“related to Iran’s ballistic missiles,” including launch sites, silos and supply chains.
Nuclear-related facilities could also be targeted if the conflict escalates, particularly amid renewed American demands that Iran halt uranium enrichment and curb its missile program.
Israel watching, bracing and waiting
The Trump administration is also hosting senior Israeli and Saudi defense and intelligence officials in Washington this week amid discussions of possible strike scenarios and regional fallout.
From an Israeli perspective, Conricus described a mood focused less on whether action will happen, and more on when—and what retaliation might follow.
“People are waiting for when will it happen? What will the consequences be for Israel?” he said, adding that Israeli forces remain at “elevated readiness.”
He argued that a weakened Islamic Republic would also undercut Tehran’s regional proxy network, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.
“Getting rid of this horrible, terror-supporting, destabilizing regime would be very beneficial,” Conricus said.
You can watch the full episode on Eye for Iran on YouTube or listen on any podcast platform of your choosing.
Saudi Defense Minister Prince Khalid bin Salman warned in a private briefing in Washington that Iran would emerge stronger if President Donald Trump does not follow through on his threats against Tehran, according to four sources present at the meeting cited by Axios.
Khalid bin Salman also held a lengthy meeting at the White House on Thursday with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, White House envoy Steve Witkoff, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine.
Decision-making circles in the United States and Israel have moved past diplomacy with Iran, viewing military action as effectively decided, with only the timing still under debate, a Western source familiar with coordination talks told Iran International.
According to the source, the key question in current meetings is no longer whether an attack will take place, but when an appropriate operational and political window will emerge — a window that could open in the coming days or take shape over the course of several weeks.
The source emphasized that, at this stage, the logic being discussed — unlike in previous periods — is not based on “reaching a new agreement.”
The United States Central Command (CENTCOM) said on Friday it will ensure the safety of American personnel, ships, and aircraft operating in the Middle East, warning it will not tolerate unsafe actions by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).
“We will not tolerate unsafe IRGC actions including overflight of US military vessels engaged in flight operations, low-altitude or armed overflight of US military assets when intentions are unclear, high-speed boat approaches on a collision course with US military vessels, or weapons trained on US forces,” CENTCOM said.
Decision-making circles in the United States and Israel have moved past diplomacy with Iran, viewing military action as effectively decided, with only the timing still under debate, a Western source familiar with coordination talks told Iran International.
According to the source, the key question in current meetings is no longer whether an attack will take place, but when an appropriate operational and political window will emerge — a window that could open in the coming days or take shape over the course of several weeks.
The source emphasized that, at this stage, the logic being discussed — unlike in previous periods — is not based on “reaching a new agreement.”
US President Donald Trump said on Thursday he planned to speak with Iran, even as he sent another warship to the Middle East and the Pentagon chief said the military would be ready to carry out whatever the president decided.
Iran however says it will not engage in negotiations unless President Trump stops threatening it.
The source told Iran International that recent assessments identify the primary objective as delivering a decisive blow to maximally weaken and ultimately collapse Iran’s governing structure; a scenario that, in his words, is not comparable in scale or intensity to anything Iran has experienced so far.
The source said the operation under discussion would be “unprecedented,” stressing: “This time, we will be facing an attack the likes of which have not been seen before.”
According to the source, joint US-Israeli discussions have also concluded that current conditions for action differ from the past.
He said decision-makers believe the present situation has created a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity,” and that, as a result, willingness to accept risk — compared with the 12-day war — has increased markedly.
The source said that during the 12-day war last June, both Washington and Tel Aviv avoided taking greater risks, but the prevailing view now is that the current moment must be seized.
In June, Israel launched a surprise military offensive against Iran, followed by US strikes on June 22 targeting key nuclear facilities in Isfahan, Natanz and Fordow.
The attacks were launched when Iran failed to reach an agreement with the United States within a 60-day deadline set by Trump.
The US president said on Friday that he had directly communicated a deadline to Iran for reaching a deal, but offered no further details.
'Israel on full alert'
The source also said Israel’s role could alter the scope of the scenario ahead. According to him, if Israel becomes directly involved — something he said has been planned for — the scale of the operation would expand, and in that case, the 12-day war would appear “very small” compared with the plans currently on the table.
The source said Israel is on full alert and that one scenario under discussion involves waiting for a “spark” to trigger the next phase, such as Iran attempting to fire a first missile toward Israel, which could then be used as justification for launching a far broader and more destructive campaign.
“The decision has been made. This will happen. The only question is when.”
