Planning options for potential strikes against Iran — including possible deployment of the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb — have been developed within the Pentagon as President Donald Trump weighs an exit from an active conflict, though some officials have expressed doubt that any such action would achieve results beyond a symbolic display.
Reporting by a television news outlet indicated that options under consideration included deploying the MOAB against energy facilities and nuclear installations in Iran. According to a person with knowledge of Pentagon deliberations, military planners have drawn up strike packages described internally as a ceremonial display rather than a decisive blow, structured to hand the president a path away from the conflict regardless of whether the campaign's stated objectives are met.
Unnamed American officials told a television network that action against sites where Tehran is thought to have stored components of its nuclear programme could take place either before or after the midterm elections. Planning documents obtained by one source describe the operation as occurring before a drawdown of forces from the CENTCOM area of responsibility, a timeline that would allow strikes to be carried out, a favorable outcome declared, and troops withdrawn from the region in short order.
Some personnel within military circles have expressed doubt that the weapon would achieve any meaningful goals. Confidential sources — whose accounts reached a television network — indicated that the munition, with a blast radius broad enough to flatten roughly nine city blocks, would in all likelihood fall short of penetrating the subterranean chambers at Pickaxe, a facility believed to sit behind successive layers of granite bedrock; one of those sources characterised the weapon as designed for wide-area surface clearance rather than deep subsurface penetration, and noted that the president had arrived at a juncture where some form of response had become increasingly difficult to forgo.
Analysts note that without munitions capable of penetrating to that depth, the MOAB's value lies primarily in its capacity to affect morale and perception — a consideration that takes on added weight as aerial operations stretching across more than six months have yet to bring any negotiated resolution into view, while members of the Republican Party weigh their positioning ahead of the following month's elections.
Privately, a number of officials have voiced doubt about whether any workable plan exists at the White House for bringing the conflict to a close. Though Trump made a public commitment to hold off on new action until after the midterms, a number of his advisers, speaking on background, expressed uncertainty about whether that commitment would remain intact through Election Day.
Advisories from allies calling for a troop withdrawal have not gained traction with Trump, according to people familiar with the matter. His position, as he has stated it, is that taking such a step would amount to an admission of failure. Some administration officials have assessed that removing Iran's military capacity entirely would require a land-based offensive operation, a course of action that projections indicate would result in substantial numbers of American troop casualties. At present, there are no parties actively advocating for it.
An administration spokesperson chose not to address "sensitive military plans that may or may not exist," adding that the president maintains every available avenue to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons — a posture underscored by the fact that no other commander-in-chief has ordered the MOAB deployed in an active combat situation.
A 21,600-pound munition was cleared for deployment against a network of fortified tunnels held by ISIS in Afghanistan, a decision taken during Trump's first term in 2017. Those officials' account described 36 militants killed, three tunnel networks rendered inoperable, and stockpiles of weapons and ammunition destroyed — with no civilian harm reported in connection with the operation.
Following that episode, questions arose about whether deploying a weapon of that scale had been warranted, and a television network noted that those same accountability concerns would likely resurface if a comparable strike were carried out against Iran.
