Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Iranian Strike Hits Israeli Hospital; Will Trump Order Attack on Iran?. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired June 19, 2025 - 13:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[13:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:00:38]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Happening now, Iran issuing a new threat, as it trades deadly aerial attacks with Israel and as President Donald Trump weighs potential U.S. military intervention, Tehran now warning of a -- quote -- "immediate reaction" if a third party gets involved.

Two U.S. defense officials tell CNN that the American military, meantime, is taking precautionary steps in the region, moving some military planes and ships, while also prepositioning additional supplies of blood.

Meantime, Israel's top military chief is issuing his own warning, declaring that Iran's supreme leader -- quote -- "cannot continue to exist" after the largest hospital in Southern Israel was hit during another barrage of Iranian missile strikes. Iran denies that it targeted the Soroka Medical Center, claiming that it struck an Israeli intelligence and command center -- quote -- "near a hospital."

Let's take you live to the White House now with CNN's Alayna Treene.

Alayna, we are expecting to hear from the press secretary during a briefing at any moment. What are you hearing from sources about how President Trump is weighing his options?

ALAYNA TREENE, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes, look, Boris, I mean, he has been very clear now. He's been saying this publicly, but also privately to those close to him, that he still has not made a final decision.

He is weighing whether or not he wants the U.S. to be involved in aiding Israel and striking Iranians' nuclear facilities. And part of these discussions behind closed doors, Boris, that I'm told about is essentially that he's trying to find ways that he can do this, the decisive strikes potentially, that would not drag the United States into another prolonged foreign war.

And that's really what a lot of those discussions have been about. Now, I will say, we know that the president is currently meeting, or, if it's not already begun, it's going to begin very momentarily in the Situation Room with some of his top national security officials.

We have seen many of them kind of trickle in to the West Wing already. That includes Vice President J.D. Vance, his special envoy, Steve Witkoff. We just saw the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, arriving to the West Wing as well. Unclear if they're all actually going to be in that intelligence meeting with the president in the Situation Room.

But, of course, we have seen them in these meetings over the past couple of days. But, look, some other things I think worth pointing out here is that the president, we're told, did review specific attack plans for Iran. However, we were told that essentially he's still kind of holding off on what he is going to decide until he can determine, to see if Tehran backs off from a nuclear weapon, or if they will actually come to the table and be more forthcoming in some of the concessions they know that the United States and the Trump administration is asking for.

So, obviously, I think at this press briefing that's expected to kick off momentarily with the press secretary, Iran and Israel are going to be the top, key questions, specifically as well some of the intelligence that the president is using in potentially to justify a potential attack on Iranian nuclear facilities, all of these, of course, key questions as we try to determine and learn more about where his mind-set is and how long he actually is going to wait to make this decision -- Boris.

SANCHEZ: And we will be watching for that press briefing momentarily.

Alayna Treene live at the White House for us, thank you so much.

Let's now go to CNN chief international correspondent Clarissa Ward, who is in Tel Aviv for us.

Clarissa, walk us through what we have learned regarding this strike in Southern Israel that impacted the hospital.

CLARISSA WARD, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: So, Boris, this took place at about 7:15 this morning.

And I will say, after a relatively quiet couple of days, this was notably a more ferocious barrage, let's say. We could hear a lot of explosions, one of those apparently making impact at the Soroka Hospital in Southern Israel., It's the largest hospital in Southern Israel.

According to Israeli officials, it hit the urology department on the fifth floor. Most people had already been evacuated, so not too many reports of heavy injuries, but still I think it was 40 patients treated for mostly minor injuries.

There has been a whole back-and-forth, Boris, now between Iranian officials, who claim that they actually struck some kind of a military intelligence command center nearby the hospital and that there was just secondary damage to the hospital as a result of that strike, and, of course, Israeli officials, who categorically deny that who say that this was a direct strike on the hospital.

[13:05:00]

And, of course, we heard some pretty fiery rhetoric from Israel's defense minister today, basically saying that Khamenei cannot continue to exist. Another interesting thing I think worth noting is the type of missile that was used, because, yesterday, we were talking about the fact that it was clear Iran's capability to fire off these ballistic missiles had been quite drastically diminished by Israeli air force strikes on those missile launchpads, but today an indication that they still have some other types of weaponry in their arsenal.

This missile was a single missile that released multiple warheads. So it is possible that we will continue to see different types of weaponry being used with different types of impact on the ground, but certainly this being seen as a significant escalation by most Israelis, even though there were not many serious casualties as a result, Boris.

SANCHEZ: And, Clarissa, we know Prime Minister Netanyahu visited the site. What did he have to say?

WARD: Well I think he was asked a lot, of course, about what his opinion was on what Donald Trump, President Donald Trump, should do, whether the U.S. should intervene more forcefully.

And, perhaps unsurprisingly, he sort of kept in line with what we have seen from Israeli officials, which was a pretty circumspect response, to say that we're already incredibly grateful for all the support that the U.S. is giving Israel, primarily in a defensive capacity, but really stopping short of applying overt pressure.

And that's something, as I said, that Israeli officials have been very cautious about doing. They don't want to be seen as strong-arming President Trump. But, privately, it's a slightly different story. They are optimistic that President Trump will weigh in on the side of intervention and they believe that essentially this next 24 to 48 hours will be decisive in terms of that -- Boris.

SANCHEZ: Clarissa Ward, thank you so much for the reporting from Tel Aviv.

Let's dig deeper now with retired U.S. Army Major General James "Spider" Marks.

General Marks, thanks for being with us.

So the reporting is that Trump has reviewed these attack plans against Iran. How far do you think U.S. involvement would have to go to set back production of the enrichment of uranium, specifically at that Fordow facility, if that winds up being the U.S. goal?

BRIG. GEN. JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: I think the U.S. would have a very direct role to play, a very specific operation that will require, no doubt, the GBU-57s, the massive ordnance penetrator, as it's known, and it would have to be delivered by the United States.

Now, bear in mind, there are other direct options that the United States could take to eliminate the capacity of the Fordow facility and the usage of the enriched uranium. Again, you go after it directly, that's one possible course of action. That has to be assessed. What does that look like?

And then you can additionally go after all the supporting and tangential functions that make that enriched uranium realized as a nuclear weapon. That means it's weaponized, it's married up with missiles, there are delivery capabilities, it's been distributed to the right locations, it's been protected, et cetera, et cetera.

So you go after all those supporting activities, you may have enriched uranium, but it can't do anything. So -- but both of those would be direct U.S. involvement. However, if the U.S. was to do that, I think we all understand the U.S. would own the outcome.

And I don't know if we're prepared for this type of a political mess. We have a sketchy past in terms of trying to facilitate regime change, right?

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: So what are the range of outcomes, from minor to major, that the U.S. has to consider here?

MARKS: Well, there could be -- Brianna, there could be not an indirect approach, but it could be, look, we're going to hold on Fordow. We can continue -- the Israelis can continue to pepper that, deliver conventional munitions, maybe close it up a little bit, damage it to a certain degree.

And then there -- and, again, as we know, the Israelis can operate on these multiple lines of operations simultaneously. They could go after a decapitation of senior leadership within the regime. And then you see, when that happens, is there an opposition in Iran? I'm not saying when there is that might then see that as a possibility for some type of internal unrest, potential movement toward collapse.

And we have seen this in the past. When that occurs, the military then has a very difficult time trying to control all that without direction from -- clear direction from above. That would be a good outcome. They would still have the enriched uranium. But, again, what are they going to do with it without the direct leadership and a very, very weakened capability to tie all that together?

[13:10:11]

SANCHEZ: That also seems like a potential nightmare, right? You're talking about Iran, which to the east is very mountainous territory.

If you have the government essentially fall apart, you could have -- it could become these military officials acting as warlords with enriched uranium in that mountainous terrain. I mean, doesn't that scare you?

MARKS: Well, sure, absolutely. Boris, you nailed it. That's the devil versus the devil you don't know in this particular

case. And if the regime were to collapse and you were to have the beginning stages of some type, I'm going to use the word revolution or extreme unrest, how does that progress? How is that put down?

And then you start to create what you described very well as this internecine, internal fighting that takes place. And that could be a monstrous headache for the region. And I think those regional partners, which have increasingly isolated Tehran -- all those regional partners are kind of tired of Iran. That's the source of all the challenges here.

How would they then try to respond? This could spin out of control pretty quickly.

KEILAR: And, General, what's the limiting factor on Israel's defense system

But also knowing U.S. assets going to the region, we saw how essential those were when it came to the Houthis trying to lob a lot of missiles at Israel. Those U.S. assets were obviously very helpful as well. Considering those as well, what are the limits here of the defense systems for Israel?

MARKS: Well, as we know, Israel has a layered air defense capability, which is pretty effective. It can be overwhelmed. We have seen that. The use -- the deployment of the U.S. Navy capability tying into some already deployed U.S. army ground forces, that's the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, the THAAD system, which complements Israel's already extant air defense capabilities.

Those capabilities are, as you described, Brianna, defensive in nature. However, they're very good for enhanced targeting. And they have -- with the aircraft carriers, the carrier strike groups that are in the region, you now have a very strong, very precise attack capability if it was determined that something else needed to be done, and bearing in mind, of course, overlaying all of this is air supremacy.

The United States and Israel can kind of do what they want night and day over Iran.

SANCHEZ: So how much longer do you think this might go on, and how much longer can Israel tolerate these ballistic missile strikes? It seems like the window for Israel is much wider than it is for Tehran.

MARKS: Yes, I think you're right. There's always a horizon, and that's assessed internally. We'd have to really get a pulse of what that's like, both in Tehran and within Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, and what's being brought forward and what's being discussed.

But in terms of what the United States would do to enhance its role, I mean, that's a presidential decision. And we know that that has changed as we have gone forward. So I'd be foolish to try to prognosticate or try to discuss what that might look like, beyond what we already see and the range of options. KEILAR: General Marks, always great to have you. Thank you so much

for being with us.

MARKS: Thank you.

KEILAR: We have much more on this escalating conflict in the Middle East, including the implications after Israel's health minister said Iran crossed a red line by striking a major hospital.

Plus, the NTSB issues a rare safety bulletin warning about potential problems for jet engines on Boeing 737 MAX planes -- ahead, what you need to know.

SANCHEZ: And police are investigating an apparent break-in at the home of the Minnesota lawmaker who was shot and killed alongside her husband -- the latest from investigators coming up on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:18:33]

SANCHEZ: Breaking news to CNN, Iran's foreign minister is now warning Israeli citizens to avoid being near any military and intelligence sites as Iran launches new attacks.

We're joined now by Avi Mayer. He's the founder of Jerusalem Journal and the former editor in chief of "The Jerusalem Post."

Avi, thank you so much for being with us.

Are there concerns about how Israel's air defense system is holding up amid these continued strikes from Iran?

AVI MAYER, FOUNDER, JERUSALEM JOURNAL: Well, Boris, good to be with you.

It's actually been quite remarkable to see how effective Israel's air defense has been over the past six days. We understand that roughly 90 percent of projectiles that have been fired by Iran at Israel have been intercepted. And the devastation, while certainly significant, has been far lower than the projections.

We have had about two dozen fatalities. Again, every single fatality, of course, is absolutely tragic. But what had been predicted were hundreds or perhaps even thousands of fatalities in the event of war with Iran. And so I think many Israelis, while, of course, being cautious, are also quite relieved to see that Israel's air defenses are doing exactly what they should be at this time.

SANCHEZ: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, though, is saying that all of Israel is paying a price amid this conflict. I wonder what you're hearing from Israelis about what's shaping up to be a prolonged engagement.

MAYER: Well, look, at the end of the day, Israelis understand that this is a fight for our survival. Israel cannot live with the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran.

[13:20:00]

A country that says openly it wants to destroy the Jewish state and is actively pursuing the means to effect that goal is not one that Israel can live alongside. And so Israelis are actually widely supportive of this military campaign. You have figures in the opposition, including the leaders of Israel's opposition, saying that they support Israel's government at this time.

And so while, of course, the price that has been paid and probably will continue to be paid has been painful, this is, I think, a price that many Israelis view as worth paying in order to ensure our ultimate survival.

SANCHEZ: I do want to ask you, Avi, about the damage to the Soroka Medical Center, because critics of the Israeli government argue that it's hypocritical to say that Iran has crossed a red line with its attack while the IDF has repeatedly attacked hospitals in Gaza, including an attack as recently as overnight in which certain children were killed at a camp.

What do you make of that argument?

MAYER: There's absolutely no comparison, zero, none at all, between an intentional effort to harm a civilian hospital in Israel, as took place this morning, and Israel's efforts to target Hamas facilities within and beneath hospitals in Gaza.

It is a double war crime that Hamas commits by utilizing, exploiting these hospitals in Gaza as bases for their operations. This isn't an allegation from Israel. It's something that has been demonstrated by foreign news outlets that have been in these hospitals and have seen Hamas taking part in the activities there.

They have seen armed activists taking part in the activities in these hospitals. They have seen the facilities beneath them as well. And the notion that there could be some kind of comparison between the intentional targeting of a civilian hospital in Israel, as we see happened this morning with unbelievable destruction and effect, and the intentional targeting of Hamas facilities in hospitals in Gaza is really quite absurd.

SANCHEZ: The Iranians make the claim that they weren't directly intentionally targeting the hospital. You obviously don't believe that line.

I want to ask you about the Israeli defense minister saying that Ayatollah Khamenei should no longer exist. Do you think regime change has now become the Israeli government's explicit goal?

MAYER: Well, just to refer to what the Iranian foreign minister said, it is absolutely preposterous to suggest that Iran is not targeting civilians. Every single one of its attacks in recent days have targeted civilians, and we have seen widespread destruction in residential areas in Israel. The only fatalities at this point in Israel have been civilians. There

have been no soldiers who have been killed. So the notion that they aren't targeting civilians is absolutely preposterous.

As for whether or not Khamenei should be eliminated, whether that is something that should be an ultimate goal, I think that many Israelis are coming into terms of the notion that a world leader who targets them, who targets their families is not one they can live alongside. And I think the defense minister was perhaps expressing that sentiment.

Yesterday, it is not, as we understand it, the view held by the prime minister at this time. But that could certainly change if Iran continues to target civilians, as it has over the past six days.

SANCHEZ: What do you imagine the aftermath of regime change in Tehran would look like? And would Israel be equipped to handle something like that on its own?

Because there's enormous trepidation within the United States about another prolonged Middle Eastern war and nation-building and all that comes with it. I wonder what you say to those folks who argue that the United States should hold back.

MAYER: Look, ultimately, it is for the Iranian people to decide who their leaders will be.

Israel is not involved in that effort and shouldn't be. I don't know that other countries would be either. But, ultimately, I think that there is a desire, a quest for freedom in Iran. We see incredible waves of support for Israeli action amongst Iranians in Iran and around the world. And they see that this is perhaps an opportunity to overthrow this oppressive regime that has been subjecting them to such horrific torture for so many years now.

Ultimately, though, that is their decision, not Israel's. And I don't think Israel has any appetite to replace this government with any other. All we want is to ensure our own survival. And so long, as that threat is removed, so long as the tyrannical regime that is affecting this effort to build a nuclear weapon or to eradicate Israel, as it says quite openly, is no longer able to do that, I think we would leave the rest of it in the hands of the Iranian people.

SANCHEZ: I totally understand that, Avi, but, respectfully, very similar things were said about Iraqis determining the future of Iraq and people in Afghanistan determining the future of that country. There's a lot that goes into governing, much more than just having the infrastructure to have an election and cast a ballot in determine its future.

What do you say to folks in the United States who say that that would wind up falling in the hands of the U.S., and it could get messy and we could wind up seeing a repeat of what we have seen over the last few decades with U.S. involvement in the Middle East?

[13:25:04] MAYER: Of course, Israel was not involved in the military campaigns in Iraq or Afghanistan. Neither of those countries were viewed as posing an existential threat to the Jewish state, as Iran under its current leadership..

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: I know. I'm just comparing to the...

MAYER: The comparison is really...

SANCHEZ: Well, I think the comparison is fair, in that people called for regime change in those circumstances, and there were obviously justifications at the time for both incursions by the United States into these countries.

But the aftermath of regime change is really what I'm talking about. And that gets messy. So what do you say to folks who say that regime change, for the United States to support that would be a mistake?

MAYER: Well, again, I would reiterate what I said earlier, which is that it is for the Iranian people decide who their leaders are going to be.

We certainly would like for there to be a leadership in Iran that is peace-loving, that is democratic, that wants to live alongside its neighbors throughout the Middle East in peace and harmony. That is what existed before the current regime came to power in the late 1970s. Israel and Iran actually have a longstanding history of close and friendly ties.

And that is certainly something we would like to see again, but, ultimately, that is not Israel's role. And I don't know that it should be the U.S.' role either. I think it should be for the Iranian people to decide who their leaders will be after this regime falls in whatever way it.

SANCHEZ: Avi Mayer, we very much appreciate you joining us to share your perspective.

MAYER: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Still ahead: It is the only bomb powerful enough to destroy a key underground nuclear facility in Iran. Up next, we have new details about the so-called bunker-buster and how it might be deployed.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)