Trump to bomb Iran within 24 hours? US military withdraws from Middle East bases, Tehran warns of retaliation

U.S. military withdraws from Middle East bases, European officials say they will act within 24 hours. Trump demands a quick and decisive strike to severely damage the regime, not a prolonged war. Iran warns Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Turkey not to use their routes, or they will become targets of retaliation. Protests have resulted in 2,600 deaths, officials say, the most violent unrest since 1979.

European officials confirm countdown to action within 24 hours for troop withdrawal

According to Reuters, U.S. officials confirm that American troops are pulling out some personnel from Middle East bases. This is because senior Iranian officials have warned that if Washington launches an attack, Tehran will retaliate by striking U.S. military bases. Two European officials revealed that military intervention by the U.S. is very likely to occur within the next 24 hours. An Israeli official also said Trump seems to have decided to intervene, but the specific scale and timing remain unclear.

A 24-hour timeframe is extremely rare in diplomatic language. When officials give such a specific prediction, it usually means military deployment is already in place, awaiting only final political decisions. The fact that European, not U.S., officials are sharing this information may be to leave Trump some room for denial or to test market and international reactions. If international pressure becomes too great, Trump can still choose to delay or cancel the action.

Three diplomats pointed out that some personnel at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar have received evacuation notices, but there are no signs yet of the large-scale troop movements seen before last year’s Iranian missile attack, where many units were bused en masse to stadiums or shopping centers. This “small-scale evacuation” and the absence of large-scale dispersal may reflect that the scope of military action has not yet been finalized, or that the U.S. military is trying to maintain readiness while avoiding overexposure of intentions.

Three signs and conflicting signals of U.S. troop withdrawal

Qatar base evacuation: Some personnel at Al Udeid Air Base have been notified, but on a limited scale

European officials confirm: Two European officials reveal action within 24 hours, rare specific timing

No signs of large-scale dispersal: No evidence of the massive evacuations seen before last year’s Iranian missile attack

Currently, the U.S. has deployed heavy forces in the Middle East, including the forward headquarters of CENTCOM at Qatar and the Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain. Previously, Iran’s allies in Lebanon and Syria faced setbacks, and after Israel and the U.S. conducted a 12-day bombing campaign last June, Iran’s government credibility was severely damaged. European powers subsequently restored UN sanctions on Iran’s nuclear program, worsening the regional economic crisis. These multiple pressures have left the Iranian regime in a highly fragile state.

NBC reports Trump’s quick and decisive strike goal to severely damage regime

Regarding potential military action, NBC News reports that Trump has explicitly told the national security team that if the U.S. takes military action against Iran, it must be a swift and decisive blow aimed at severely damaging the regime, not a prolonged conflict lasting weeks or months. Sources say Trump emphasizes that if they act, it must be thorough, but his advisors have yet to assure him that airstrikes can quickly topple the Iranian regime.

Trump’s demand for a “quick and decisive” strike reflects his consistent attitude toward Middle East military intervention. During his first term, he criticized the Bush administration’s Iraq War and Obama’s Libya intervention, believing these actions were costly but failed to achieve clear objectives. Trump wants to avoid repeating these mistakes—if he acts, it should be a lethal blow to overthrow Iran’s regime and then withdraw quickly, not get mired in long-term occupation and governance.

However, the gap between this “quick and decisive” desire and military reality is significant. Overthrowing a regime with hundreds of thousands of troops and militias is far more complex than destroying a few nuclear facilities or military bases. Even if airstrikes eliminate top Iranian leaders, who will fill the power vacuum? Will the Revolutionary Guard surrender or resist? Will Shia militias disband or retaliate? These questions have no simple answers.

U.S. officials also worry that the U.S. may not have enough defensive assets deployed in the region to counter Iran’s fierce retaliation, adding uncertainty to decision-making. Iran possesses numerous ballistic and cruise missiles capable of striking U.S. bases across the Middle East. Additionally, Iran’s proxy forces in Iraq, Syria, and Yemen could launch simultaneous attacks. If U.S. missile defense systems (like THAAD and Patriot) cannot intercept these strikes fully, U.S. forces could suffer significant casualties, provoking domestic backlash.

Tehran warns Saudi Arabia and 2,600 deaths regime on the brink of collapse

Meanwhile, a senior Iranian official told Reuters that Tehran has warned regional allies—Saudi Arabia, UAE, and Turkey—that if the U.S. uses their bases to attack Iran, those bases will become targets of retaliation. This diplomatic pressure aims to isolate the U.S., preventing it from finding reliable operational bases in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia, a traditional U.S. ally, has improved relations with Iran in recent years and is reluctant to get involved in U.S.-Iran conflict. If Saudi Arabia refuses U.S. use of its bases, it will significantly limit U.S. options.

Recently, Iran has experienced severe anti-government protests, which both Tehran and Western countries describe as the most violent unrest since the Islamic Revolution in 1979 established Shia clerical rule. An Iranian official revealed that over 2,000 people have died, while human rights groups estimate the death toll exceeds 2,600. Iran’s Armed Forces Chief of Staff, Abdolrahim Mousavi, recently accused foreign powers of interference and stated that Iran has never faced such widespread destruction, indicating the regime is under an unprecedented crisis.

The death toll of 2,600 is extremely rare in peaceful protests; such casualties are usually seen only in civil wars or revolutions. This indicates that Iranian security forces are using live ammunition rather than non-lethal weapons like tear gas or rubber bullets. Such brutal repression reflects the regime’s panic—knowing that losing control could lead to the collapse of the entire system. But excessive repression might also fuel more public anger, drawing more neutral citizens into the protests.

Strategically, Trump’s decision to strike amid Iran’s internal turmoil is carefully calculated. When the regime is busy suppressing domestic protests, its capacity to respond to external attacks is weakened. Moreover, if the U.S. attack leads to regime collapse, it can claim to support the Iranian people’s democratic movement rather than an invasion, making it easier to justify internationally.