U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth has revealed that American armed forces were fully prepared to launch the largest military strike on Iran since World War II; however, the operation has been temporarily postponed for now. Despite the delay, U.S. forces remain in an extraordinary state of high military readiness.

According to U.S. President Donald Trump, the proposed operation would have been the “largest attack since World War II,” but it was temporarily halted following intense diplomatic efforts by regional and Gulf countries.

Stern Warning from U.S. Defense Secretary:

Amid ongoing tensions between the United States and Iran, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth stated that the military is fully prepared for any potential action against Iran, with readiness at a level rarely seen since World War II. Sharing a video of President Donald Trump on the social media platform ‘X’, Hegseth emphasized that the U.S. Department of Defense was ready and remains ready, succinctly describing the military as “fully prepared.”

From a journalistic standpoint, there is a distinct nuance in their statements: President Donald Trump claimed the operation itself would be the “largest attack since World War II,” whereas Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth compared the U.S. military’s level of readiness to the extraordinary posture last observed after World War II.

Trump Postpones Plan for Major Strike:

Speaking to reporters, President Donald Trump claimed that the U.S. was on the verge of launching a massive military operation against Iran; however, the attack was halted after Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Iran requested more time. Trump asserted that the proposed action could have been devastating for Iran, with a scale surpassing major post-World War II attacks, adding that the U.S. has postponed—not canceled—the strike in hopes of a swift agreement.

According to the U.S. President, a potential agreement could include fully opening the Strait of Hormuz, addressing U.S. concerns regarding Iran’s nuclear program, and halting further military actions in the region. He warned, however, that if progress is not made in negotiations, the option of military action could be revisited.

Diplomatic Intervention by Saudi Arabia and Gulf Nations:

According to international media reports, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman held a telephone conversation with Donald Trump, urging him to avoid massive strikes against Iran and to prioritize diplomatic talks to de-escalate tensions. Qatar, the UAE, and Oman also engaged in diplomatic channels to pave the way for a possible understanding between Washington and Tehran.

Gulf nations harbour severe concerns that a new U.S. military strike could engulf the entire region in war, posing grave risks to oil and gas installations, ports, and critical maritime routes. A primary driver of regional anxiety is the Strait of Hormuz, through which historically around 20 percent of the world’s oil and gas trade passes, as a prolonged disruption there could severely impact global energy prices, supply chains, and maritime commerce.

Iran Dismisses U.S. Claims as Psychological Warfare:

Iranian officials have strongly rejected claims that Tehran requested the U.S. to hold off on an attack. Iran’s Acting Defense Minister, Majid Ibn Al-Reza, characterized U.S. statements as “psychological and cognitive warfare,” asserting that Tehran takes every threat seriously and will continue to bolster its defense readiness.

In this regard, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi previously warned that any new action by the U.S. or Israel would be met with a “decisive and proportionate” response. Tehran maintains that it is not seeking to build nuclear weapons, whereas Washington insists Iran must provide verifiable guarantees regarding its uranium enrichment and missile programs.

New Phase of Talks and Diplomatic Engagement:

According to the schedule outlined by Donald Trump, a new round of negotiations between the U.S. and Iran was set to begin on August 3; however, he did not disclose full details regarding the location, participants, or procedural format of the talks. Reports indicate that Qatar, Oman, and Pakistan have played roles at various stages in facilitating communications between Washington and Tehran.

Iranian officials stated that talks with Oman regarding new navigation arrangements in the Strait of Hormuz are in their final stages, though Tehran clarified that this issue is distinct from the broader matter of fully opening or closing the strait.

Scale of U.S. Military Capabilities:

Official data released by the U.S. Department of Defense provides a glimpse into the vast scale of American military preparation. According to official documents, “Operation Epic Fury” against Iran was initiated on February 28, 2026.

U.S. Central Command claimed that during the initial 29 days, forces targeted over 11,000 objectives, flew more than 11,000 combat sorties, and destroyed or damaged over 150 Iranian naval vessels. The operation featured stealth bombers, fighter jets, attack and surveillance drones, nuclear submarines, aircraft carriers, air defense systems, and long-range precision weaponry.

From Ceasefire to Resumption of Strikes:

U.S. administration documents state that a ceasefire took effect on April 7, 2026, followed by a Memorandum of Understanding signed between Iran and the U.S. on June 17, aimed at securing safe transit for commercial shipping from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman.

However, Washington alleged that neutral commercial vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz were attacked after July 6. In response, U.S. forces resumed targeting missile sites, air defense systems, naval assets, command centers, and military facilities in Iran starting July 7, allegations and unilateral narratives that Iran continues to reject.

Threat to Target Iranian Power Plants and Bridges:

President Donald Trump previously issued a severe threat, stating that if necessary, the U.S. could destroy most of Iran’s bridges in less than an hour and disable its power plants within a day.

According to Trump, such a move could deprive nearly 91 million Iranian citizens of electricity and basic services, though he noted a desire to avoid this scenario through an agreement. Statements regarding the targeting of civilian infrastructure have raised serious international concerns in light of human rights and international law.

Threat, Pressure, or Real Preparation for War?

Statements from Pete Hegseth and Donald Trump cannot be dismissed as mere rhetoric, as the U.S. has already conducted extensive military operations against Iran and maintains heavy military assets in the region, backing Washington’s threats with operational capability. On the other hand, language describing the “largest attack since World War II” appears to be part of a strategy to compel immediate concessions from Iran—a tactic referred to diplomatically as “negotiating under the shadow of military pressure.”

Gulf countries stand to be the first affected by a renewed conflict, as an attack on Iran could prompt Tehran to retaliate against U.S. bases, Israeli installations, oil fields, or maritime lanes in the Gulf. This explains why Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, and Oman are pressing to keep diplomatic avenues open. The postponement of the attack does not mean the threat has vanished; U.S. military readiness remains active, Iran has not withdrawn its warning of retaliation, and no formal agreement has been announced. Should upcoming negotiations fail, a minor naval incident or attack on a base could reopen the door to full-scale war, leaving the critical question of whether Washington and Tehran can reach a viable agreement before catastrophic consequences unfold.