Skip to content
Sign in
Defense & Security · Middle East

US military plans could include GBU-43/B 'Mother of All Bombs' for strikes on Iranian sites

US military planners have developed contingency strike plans that could include using the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) against Iranian energy infrastructure and buried nuclear sites if President Donald Trump orders renewed combat operations. Reports say planners identified targets such as energy facilities and the suspected Pickaxe Mountain nuclear site and that the White House declined to confirm the plans while saying the president "keeps all options on the table."

AI-assisted synthesis · Based on 7 outlets' reporting · Article text read from 4 of 7 outletsHow it's made

View timeline · 7 entries
7 outlets3 regionsLatest reporting 4 min readNo new reporting in 4 days
Coverage: MixedL 0 · C 3 · R 2 · 2 unrated
Updat3 graphic: United States
Updat3 graphic · Map data: Natural Earth Natural Earth (public domain)

What happened

Key facts

  • President Donald Trump described a reported plan to deploy the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) against Iranian energy infrastructure and nuclear facilities.
  • CBS News and CNN reported the White House and Pentagon prepared plans to deploy the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) against Iran if President Donald Trump orders a resumption of combat operations.
  • Trump made the remarks in an interview with Newsmax anchor Rob Finnerty and said the bomb "isn't nuclear" while calling it "like a tiny nuclear bomb."
  • The MOAB is a GPS-guided conventional explosive weapon weighing approximately 21,000 pounds with a warhead of about 18,700 pounds of explosives.
  • The weapon was developed by the Air Force Research Laboratory in 2003 and is designed to detonate above ground to create an intense pressure wave for broad-area damage.
  • The administration is considering the plan while the conflict with Iran remains unresolved over seven months after its start in early March 2026; the article was published October 15, 2026.
  • Trump said the MOAB would be used only if he orders U.S. combat operations to resume.
  • CNN, citing US officials familiar with planning, said potential targets included energy infrastructure and the suspected nuclear facility at Pickaxe Mountain.

The brief

US military planners have drawn up contingency strike options that could include the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast, commonly known as the MOAB, to hit Iranian energy infrastructure and buried nuclear facilities if President Donald Trump orders renewed combat operations.

Multiple reports citing US officials and planning documents say the options cover large-area conventional blasts; the White House declined to confirm the existence of the plans while saying the president "keeps all options on the table." CNN and CBS News are the primary outlets identified in the reporting as having spoken to officials familiar with the planning.

Those outlets and subsequent coverage named energy infrastructure and a suspected facility at Pickaxe Mountain among potential targets; some reporting linked Pickaxe Mountain to U.S. and Israeli assessments that Iran placed nuclear program components deep underground there.

The accounts in the coverage describe the MOAB as a GPS-guided conventional weapon weighing roughly 21,000–21,600 pounds with an explosive payload reported at about 18,700 pounds, designed to create a very large blast over a wide area rather than to penetrate deep underground.

The distinction between the MOAB and the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator appears in reporting: the GBU-57 is noted as heavier overall but with a smaller warhead, a point planners consider when weighing options against hardened or buried targets.

A Pentagon official cited in CBS News told reporters the department "plans for a wide range of operational scenarios" to carry out direction from civilian leadership, language the reporting uses to explain why planners have developed multiple weapon options.

Coverage notes the MOAB has a precedent of combat use: US forces dropped it in April 2017 on an Islamic State tunnel complex in Afghanistan, an action Afghan officials said killed 36 IS fighters; that historical detail is cited in multiple accounts as context for the weapon's past employment.

Outlets differ in emphasis and sourcing: some reports frame the planning as coming from the White House and Pentagon together, while others cite unnamed US officials or "officials familiar with the planning"; the White House statement quoted in CBS News and the White House responses reported by other outlets declined to confirm the plans.

Reporting does not include any public, independent confirmation that the plans have been approved for execution, nor does it provide new evidence that the MOAB is scheduled for use; all accounts say use would follow a presidential order to resume major combat operations.

The public reporting also does not provide on-the-record cost estimates for deploying the weapon, legal analyses in the public record regarding its use against the kinds of targets named, or any documented assessment of civilian risk tied to the specific proposed targets in Iran.

Why it matters

  • Civilians in areas around named energy facilities and Pickaxe Mountain face the concrete mechanism of wide-area blast effects if the MOAB were used, because the weapon is reported to deliver roughly 18,700 pounds of explosive over several city-blocks-equivalent area.
  • The chain of command for execution lies with President Donald Trump; reports say the weapon would be used only after a presidential order to resume major combat operations, making a single political decision the immediate trigger for deployment.
  • The Pentagon's acknowledged planning across a "wide range of operational scenarios" documents a formalised set of military options that can be executed quickly, which affects operational timelines for Iranian energy infrastructure and hardened sites named in reporting.
  • U.S. and Israeli interest in Pickaxe Mountain as a location for buried nuclear components creates overlapping operational claims on the same target set, as noted in reporting that cites U.S. and Israeli officials’ assessments of subterranean relocation.

What to watch next

  • Whether President Donald Trump orders a resumption of major combat operations, which reporting says would be the trigger to execute any MOAB option.
  • Whether the Pentagon or White House publishes or confirms a formal target list that includes Pickaxe Mountain or named energy infrastructure.
  • Whether US officials provide public legal or operational justification for use of the MOAB against hardened or buried facilities, as distinct from other munitions such as the GBU-57.
  • Whether reports citing CNN, CBS News and other outlets produce named on-the-record officials who confirm planning details or weapon assignment decisions.

How it's being covered

Coverage analysisShow details
7 source articles · 7 unique outlets
Outlet political mix: Mixed· 3 Center · 2 Right · 2 unrated
Where the outlets are based: Asia 43% · US/Canada 29% · Other 28%
Outlet political mix
Mixed
Left
Center
Right
0 outlets
3 outlets
2 outlets
The marker shows coverage balance: each unique outlet counts once. 2 unrated outlets are not included.
Geography
Where the outlets covering this story are based.
7 unique outletsDominant coverage: Asia
How we measure coverage

How outlets' accounts compare

2 framing differences · 3 uncorroborated claims · 4 information gaps
The reports repeat the same account with different emphasis; its central claims are not independently confirmed in the reporting Updat3 read.Compared across 4 reports whose article text Updat3 read; 3 other outlets were checked by headline only.
Framing / emphasis differences
Sources emphasise different angles, actors or consequences of the same reporting.
  • Some outlets frame the plans as prepared jointly by the White House and the Pentagon (The Times of India), while others attribute the existence of the plans to unnamed US officials cited by CNN (Washington Examiner, Khaleej Times).
  • Outlets vary in emphasis on the MOAB's suitability for buried targets: some note it is designed for wide-area blast (Outlook India, Khaleej Times), while reporting that mentions the GBU-57 highlights that the GBU-57 is a bunker-buster option better suited for penetration (Khaleej Times).
Updat3: These are differences of emphasis, not disputes about what is reported. They do not show that the reported claims are true.
One-sided or uncorroborated claims
Claims that come from one party or one source family and are not independently corroborated.
  • The White House is quoted as saying the president "keeps all options on the table"; CBS News attributes a Pentagon official saying the department "plans for a wide range of operational scenarios"; CNN is cited by multiple outlets as the source for officials who described the planning.
  • "We do not comment on sensitive military plans that may or may not exist. President Trump keeps all options on the table to ensure that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon," — White House spokesperson quoted in CBS News.
  • "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," — Pentagon official quoted in CBS News.
Updat3: Not independently corroborated yet — treat as a claim, not an established fact.
Not established by the reporting
Information the available reporting does not contain or confirm. This is a gap, not a disagreement.
  • No report Updat3 read in this pack provides on-the-record legal analyses or public risk assessments about civilian casualties tied to the specific named targets.
  • No source in this set documents alternative prior actions that would legally or operationally compel a presidential order to resume major combat operations.
  • No source cites specific operational timelines, logistics preparations, cost estimates, or unit-level tasking orders that would confirm readiness to deploy the weapon to the named targets.
  • No source provides independent confirmation that the MOAB plans have been approved for execution; outlets report they would be carried out only if President Trump orders renewed combat operations.
Updat3: Updat3 cannot conclude anything about this from the current sources.

Timeline

Developments from this story's sources, dated background we compiled and fact-checked, and our earlier coverage. Each row says which.
  1. The Air Force Research Laboratory developed the GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast bomb.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  2. Iran and six world powers signed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  3. The MOAB was first used in combat in April 2017 when US forces dropped it on an Islamic State tunnel complex in Afghanistan.
    Reported in this story's sourcesSource:outlookindia.com
  4. The U.S. military dropped a GBU-43/B bomb in Afghanistan’s Nangarhar province.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  5. The United States withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  6. Donald Trump was inaugurated for a second term as president.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  7. The United States and Israel launched coordinated military strikes across Iran, beginning the war.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3

How we got here

Immediate backdrop: on March 20, 2026, the United States and Israel carried out coordinated strikes on Iranian infrastructure and air defenses, a campaign that U.S. and Israeli officials described in public statements as part of an expanding kinetic confrontation with Iran; those strikes followed weeks of escalating exchanges between Tehran and U.S. forces earlier in 2026.

Before the 2026 campaign, President Donald Trump took office on January 20, 2025, reasserting a presidential posture that officials said would keep military options open for Iranian contingencies. Those operational choices sit atop statutory authorities and defense practices dating back decades: the War Powers Resolution of 1973 (Pub. L.

Original sources

1 of 7 articles · Unknown · Show all

Every story links to the reporting it was built from. How we choose sources

Spotted a factual error, a broken link or a misleading summary? Tell us.