Daily Mail, on Iran, 15 October 2026

6.0out of 10Serious

Trump considers using 'mother of all bombs' against Iran as president faces pressure to end the war, report says

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.4 findings

President Donald Trump is considering unleashing America's most powerful non-nuclear bomb against Iran in a devastating new assault as pressure mounts to end the deeply unpopular war. The Pentagon has developed plans to deploy the 21,600-pound 'mother of all bombs' against Iranian nuclear facilities and energy infrastructure in what would represent a dramatic escalation of the six-month conflict. The enormous weapon, officially known as the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb, or MOAB, is capable of devastating an area equivalent to nine city blocks.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The article speaks of 'the deeply unpopular war' and 'the six-month conflict' but never says that the US and Israel began it by launching strikes on Iran on February 28. The Daily Mail reported this the day before. Without it, a reader is not told who started the war the new strikes would continue.

How we know

But military insiders have warned that the spectacular explosion might do little to achieve Trump's ultimate objective of forcing Tehran into submission. The plans, revealed by CNN following conversations with multiple US officials, could be implemented before or after November's midterm elections if Trump authorizes renewed combat operations. The president has publicly pledged not to launch fresh attacks before voters head to the polls, although some advisers privately question whether that promise will hold.

Behind closed doors, administration officials are reportedly scrambling to find a way for Trump to declare victory and withdraw American forces without appearing to have backed down. One source told CNN that the latest proposals include strikes on 'a lot of energy infrastructure' and the potential deployment of the MOAB. A Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) weapon is prepared for testing at the Eglin Air Force Armament Center in March 2003 A Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) bomb, is launched in November 2003 at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida Trump is facing mounting pressure to bring the six-month war to an end, but reportedly fears that withdrawing American forces without a decisive victory would make him appear defeated The operation was reportedly discussed as taking place 'prior to US retrograde in CENTCOM AOR (area of responsibility).'

That wording suggests the White House could authorize a final, overwhelming bombardment before announcing victory and rapidly withdrawing troops from the region. Another source revealed that the enormous bomb features explicitly in plans to attack Iran's suspected nuclear facilities, including the heavily fortified Pickaxe Mountain complex . US and Israeli officials believe Tehran has stored components of its nuclear program at the site, which Trump has repeatedly threatened to attack.

But despite the MOAB's extraordinary destructive power, military experts have serious doubts about its ability to penetrate the thick layers of granite believed to protect the underground facility. Unlike specialized bunker-busting weapons, the MOAB is primarily designed to unleash a devastating blast across a vast area rather than drill deep beneath the earth. 'The MOAB is a massive information operation type weapon that is great for huge area clearance but not much else,' a source familiar with Pentagon planning told CNN. 'It is definitely not designed as a deep penetration warhead.'

Nicknamed the 'mother of all bombs,' the 21,600-pound MOAB unleashes an enormous shockwave capable of devastating vast areas, although experts warn it is poorly suited to destroying nuclear facilities buried deep underground The weapon could inflict catastrophic damage above ground while leaving deeply buried nuclear installations largely intact. Its enormous blast radius would also raise serious concerns about civilian casualties, particularly if Iranian energy facilities near populated areas were targeted.

Nevertheless, some officials believe the psychological impact of dropping such a terrifying weapon could demonstrate overwhelming American military strength without restarting a full-scale bombing campaign. 'POTUS has unfortunately put himself in a situation where he is almost compelled to do something and, without the ammunition designed to penetrate that level … you have to look at psychological effects for which the MOAB is well-equipped,' the source added.

The dilemma comes as Trump confronts growing frustration over a war that has dragged on for more than six months without a negotiated settlement. Republicans are increasingly anxious that the conflict could damage their electoral prospects in the approaching midterms, while the president remains reluctant to withdraw without securing a clear victory. Although some administration officials have suggested the United States has effectively won, Trump has stopped short of declaring the conflict over.

He has also reportedly resisted suggestions from outside allies that he should simply bring American forces home, arguing that such a withdrawal would be perceived as defeat. Your browser does not support iframes. Unlike conventional bunker-busting bombs, the MOAB detonates above ground, unleashing an immense blast wave capable of destroying structures and equipment across a vast area Despite its destructive power, military experts warn that the bomb is unlikely to penetrate the heavily fortified underground nuclear facilities believed to be hidden beneath Iran's mountains Instead, senior advisers have spent weeks searching for a military or diplomatic breakthrough that would allow the administration to claim a decisive success.

Some proposed strikes have been described by officials as a 'fireworks show,' intended to create a dramatic finale even if they fail to accomplish the war's original strategic objectives. Military planners have also considered options designed to deliver a 'symbolic' victory while preserving the possibility of negotiations, including an agreement to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Yet officials privately acknowledge that additional bombing alone may not force Iran's leadership to surrender or abandon its nuclear ambitions.

Some within the administration and among outside analysts believe a decisive military defeat of Iran would require a massive ground operation, potentially costing thousands of American lives. Trump has shown little appetite for sending American ground troops into the country, leaving the administration searching for alternatives. The White House has not confirmed the existence of the latest strike plans.

The Pentagon similarly declined to discuss specific operations. 'The Department of War plans for a wide range of operational scenarios to execute Presidential and Secretary-level direction and to ensure mission success in any operational environment,' a spokesperson said. This US Department of Defense (DoD) handout photo shows technicians preparing the MOAB weapon at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida in March 2003. The 21,000 pound bomb was dropped from a C-130 Hercules aircraft at the Eglin test range The MOAB was originally developed ahead of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, with military planners envisioning a weapon capable of terrifying enemy forces into surrender The MOAB was originally developed ahead of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, with military planners envisioning a weapon capable of terrifying enemy forces into surrender.

Designed to detonate above the ground, the GPS-guided bomb unleashes an enormous shockwave intended to devastate exposed troops, equipment and fortified surface positions. Its terrifying reputation was established in April 2017, when Trump became the first president to authorize its use in combat. The weapon was dropped on an ISIS tunnel complex in Afghanistan, reportedly killing 36 militants and destroying three underground tunnels along with weapons and ammunition.

Afghan and American officials said at the time that no civilians had been injured, although questions were raised about whether such an enormous weapon had been necessary. What is the 'Mother of All Bombs'? The GBU-43 is a GPS-guided weapon that weighs an enormous 21,600 pounds (10 tonnes), according to the Eglin Air Force Base. The MOAB was designed in 2002 as a replacement for the BLU-82 Daisy Cutter. Its purpose was initially to put pressure on former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

The bomb was sent to the Middle East in 2003, but it was not used until April 2017 when a Lockheed Martin MC-130 Hercules dropped the device on an alleged Islamic State (IS) cave complex in the Achin district of the southern Nangarhar province. In this US Air Force handout, a GBU-43/B bomb, or Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) bomb, is launched on November 21, 2003 at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida Each one costs US$16 million (£12.6 million), according to military information website Deagel.

The US military says it has 20 MOAB bombs and has spent about US$314 million (£248 million) producing them, according to CNBC. The weapon is so big that, while the cargo plane is in the air, the bomb rolls out of the rear on a pallet, pulled by a drogue parachute. , and . Source: New York Times , Time

Read the original article on dailymail.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (4)

The Daily Mail reports CNN's account of US plans to use the MOAB against Iran, attributing most claims to officials and sources. Its own factbox then says the bomb is designed to destroy underground facilities, which its body text and quoted source contradict, and it gives a blast radius that clashes with its earlier figure. Only US voices appear, and Iran's stated position that its programme is peaceful is never given.

  1. Makes a false claim

    Serious

    “It is designed to destroy tunnels and other underground facilities”

    Why this matters
    The Daily Mail states in its own voice that the MOAB is designed to destroy tunnels and other underground facilities.
    The impression it gives
    A reader of the factbox comes away thinking the bomb is built to destroy buried sites such as Iran's underground nuclear facilities.
    The context
    The article's own body says the MOAB is designed to blast a wide area rather than drill beneath the earth. Its quoted Pentagon source says it is 'definitely not designed as a deep penetration warhead'. Other coverage reports the same doubts about its use against deep sites.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“It is definitely not designed as a deep penetration warhead.”
    • Elsewhere in the article“rather than drill deep beneath the earth”
    • The Telegraph reported“Some US officials have questioned whether the Moab would work on Iranian nuclear facilities that are located deep underground.”Trump lines up ‘mother of all bombs’ to strike Iran (opens in a new tab)

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    The MOAB is an air-burst weapon designed to devastate a wide surface area, and a source familiar with Pentagon planning says it is not designed to penetrate deeply buried facilities.

  2. Uses figures that mislead

    Minor

    “its blast radius is estimated to stretch a mile in every direction”

    Why this matters
    The Daily Mail gives a blast radius of a mile in every direction with no source for the estimate.
    The impression it gives
    A reader takes the bomb's destructive reach to be miles across.
    The context
    The same article earlier puts the devastated area at the equivalent of nine city blocks, far smaller than a mile-radius circle. The two figures cannot both be right, and the article does not reconcile them.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“capable of devastating an area equivalent to nine city blocks”

    Show it in the article

  3. One side gets the space

    Minor

    “'President Trump keeps all options on the table to ensure that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon,' an official told CNN.”

    Why this matters
    The Daily Mail closes with a White House line and then a Pentagon statement. No Iranian official, analyst or response appears anywhere in the piece.
    The impression it gives
    A reader hears only US officials on a plan to bomb Iranian energy and nuclear sites, and the US framing of Iran's nuclear programme stands as the last word.
    The context
    Iran's position that its programme is peaceful was reported the same day. Analysts quoted in other coverage dismissed the plan as political theatre.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  4. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article speaks of 'the deeply unpopular war' and 'the six-month conflict' but never says that the US and Israel began it by launching strikes on Iran on February 28. The Daily Mail reported this the day before. Without it, a reader is not told who started the war the new strikes would continue.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Daily Mail

  1. 24 OctChilling US intelligence memo warns Iran's plots to assassinate American officials are in 'advanced stages'...as diplomats are pulled from Middle East embassies3.0
  2. 22 OctUS troops evacuate bases across Middle East due to ongoing threats as Trump mulls major strike on Iran3.0
  3. 20 OctTwo men arrested over suspected RAF Fairford 'terror plot' are rearrested on suspicion of helping Iran's intelligence service6.0
  4. 17 OctIranians go fishing for iPhones and French perfume floating in the Strait of Hormuz after container ship is blown up by mine and sinks7.3
  5. 14 OctIran aims to humiliate Trump and ensure mid-term elections defeat with new Strait of Hormuz tactics6.0

Everything we scored from Daily Mail