US political commentator Tucker Carlson has claimed that the Trump administration could be considering a nuclear strike against Iran, alleging that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is pressing Washington to resume military operations against Tehran.
In a commentary, Tucker Carlson identified Pickax Mountain in central Iran as the alleged target, claiming that Israeli intelligence believes Iran has restarted its nuclear enrichment programme at an underground facility there. He argued that the depth and fortification of the site could make it difficult to destroy with conventional weapons.
Carlson further alleged that Netanyahu had been urging senior US officials to support renewed military action and claimed that the Israeli premier was in frequent contact with US President Donald Trump over the issue.
He suggested that Netanyahu’s political difficulties at home had increased his incentive to maintain close ties with Trump and secure continued American support. Carlson also claimed that senior figures within the US administration were divided over whether to pursue further military action or seek a diplomatic settlement with Tehran.
Under pressure from Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Trump administration may be within days of launching a nuclear strike on Iran. The target would be Pickax Mountain in central Iran, where Israeli intelligence claims the Iranian government has restarted its nuclear enrichment program. No conventional weapon in the American arsenal can penetrate 300 feet of solid granite to destroy the tunnels where enrichment is supposedly taking place. The only military option is a nuclear strike. Netanyahu has been pushing hard for one. “Bibi calls Trump about it every day,” says an informed observer.
Netanyahu is cornered and desperate. After last week’s election results, he can’t form a government unless Trump intervenes directly in Israeli politics and brokers a deal with other parties that gives Netanyahu 61 seats in the Knesset. Otherwise, he is out as prime minister and on his way to ignominy, investigations and possibly jail. Netanyahu must stay close to Trump. He needs this war.
To that end, he’s applied maximum pressure to his closest allies in the administration, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and CENTCOM commander Brad Cooper. Both oppose a negotiated settlement to the war they’ve so grievously mismanaged; both are pushing to restart major combat operations. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and CIA director John Ratcliffe are also following Netanyahu’s lead, as are leaders of the Democratic Party. In a recent meeting on the subject, former president Barack Obama said he opposes the current Iran peace deal being drafted in Doha.
The rest of America’s longtime allies in the Middle East are terrified by the prospect of more war. On September 27th, Netanyahu flew secretly to Abu Dhabi to enlist the UAE in his lobbying effort for a final attack on Iran. The Emiratis refused. After eight months of conflict, Gulf economies are teetering. So are global energy and fertilizer markets. They won’t recover soon. Globally, there are a total of about 850 supertankers used to transport oil from producers to the rest of the world. In October alone, 11 of them were badly damaged in Hormuz. At this pace, a global depression is imminent. A nuclear strike would radically accelerate the destruction. Fallout from a ground explosion at Pickax Mountain would contaminate the Persian Gulf, poisoning the water supply for 100 million people.
And those are just some of the immediate consequences for the region. The rest of the world is every bit as exposed. No country other than the United States has ever used a nuclear weapon in war. Some would like to. An American nuclear attack on Iran would set a new precedent. The Russians have already told at least two other governments that an American nuclear strike on Iran would free them to use nuclear weapons against Ukraine. Pakistan and India would be tempted to do the same against each other, as would North Korea against Seoul. After the first nuclear strike, World War Three is inevitable. That war would be short and final.
We’ve been sleepwalking toward this moment for months. Since February, the administration has quietly rewritten America’s nuclear doctrine to make first use of so-called “battlefield nukes” easier and therefore more likely. No one in Washington in either party seems bothered by this. Now we’re on the brink of it.
Close observers say Trump is likely to decide by next weekend whether or not to use nuclear weapons. That would be November 7, six days from now. To his credit, he’s hesitating. At the moment, Trump is listening to his vice president, JD Vance, and to his envoy and friend Steve Witkoff, both of whom argue a deal with Iran can be made.
They’re right, though it won’t be simple. The Iranians are famously frustrating to negotiate with under any circumstances, and elements of that government have become more radical since Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his family were killed in February. After decades of isolation, even relatively moderate Iranian leaders seem confused by how decisions are made in the West. (There is a widespread belief in Tehran, for example, that the United States government controls Israel.) But overall, people who have spoken to decision-makers in Iran say there is consensus there that more war is bad for everyone and a deal is worth making.
One group that hasn’t been consulted so far is the global population — the hundreds of millions of people who will be killed along with their children if Trump is pushed by Netanyahu into launching a nuclear strike next week. Now would be the time for them to speak up.
— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) November 2, 2026
According to Carlson, Vice President JD Vance and US envoy Steve Witkoff favour negotiations, while other officials are more inclined towards renewed military operations. He said Trump could face a decision on the matter by November 7, although no official announcement or confirmation of such a deadline has been made.
Carlson warned that a nuclear attack on Iran could have devastating consequences for the Middle East and the wider world. He raised concerns about possible radioactive contamination of the Persian Gulf, disruption to international energy supplies and the risk of a wider nuclear confrontation.
He also argued that the use of nuclear weapons against Iran could establish a dangerous precedent and increase the likelihood of other countries resorting to nuclear arms in future conflicts.
The commentator maintained that a diplomatic agreement remained possible, saying that despite significant obstacles, there was reportedly support among Iranian decision-makers for avoiding another round of war.
However, Carlson’s claims about a potential US nuclear strike, Netanyahu’s alleged lobbying, divisions within the Trump administration and the November 7 deadline have not been independently verified. No official statement from the White House or Israeli government has confirmed that a nuclear attack on Iran is being considered.
