IDF General: War Will Not End Until Missile, Nuclear Threat Destroyed

| Published June 17, 2025

In a striking escalation of rhetoric and resolve, a senior Israel Defense Forces (IDF) commander declared that the ongoing offensive against Iran will not end until both the Islamic Republic’s nuclear capabilities and long-range missile systems are entirely dismantled. This pronouncement, made by Maj. Gen. Oded Basiuk, reflects a hardened Israeli doctrine—one that prioritizes permanent neutralization of existential threats over short-term ceasefires or diplomatic overtures. It signals a protracted and uncompromising campaign with goals rooted in strategic survival rather than battlefield attrition.

The Strategic Stakes and Israel’s Long Game

1. Public declaration of enduring objectives
Maj. Gen. Oded Basiuk, head of IDF operations, has made clear that Israel’s campaign—Operation Rising Lion—won’t end until two existential threats are neutralized: Iran’s nuclear program and its ballistic missile arsenal. This signals a campaign with strategic, not tactical, timelines—ironclad in policy, ambiguous in duration.

2. Scope of military operations underway

• Air supremacy achieved: Israel has systematically taken out Iranian air defenses, securing control of Western Iran and Tehran’s airspace.

• Precision strikes across multiple domains: The IDF has targeted missile launchers, nuclear facilities (Natanz, Fordo), command centers, IRGC leadership, and nuclear scientists—reportedly destroying over 200 missile launchers.

• Collateral costs and logistics: Early airstrikes have reportedly killed 200+ Iranians and 24 Israelis; Iran has launched ~350 missiles so far.

3. Tactical breakthroughs vs. strategic setbacks
Israel’s air campaign and Mossad-facilitated precision strikes have struck deep—but analysts note that many Iranian nuclear sites are fortified and bunkered, meaning the path to complete elimination remains arduous .

4. Legal and doctrinal framing
Drawing on the Begin Doctrine, Israel justifies preemptive strikes against existential WMD threats like a nuclear-capable Iran. The move reflects Israel’s long-held policy of striking before threats materialize.

⚠️ Broader Implications & Risks: Regional Shockwaves and Strategic Repercussions

Israel’s commitment to continue its offensive until Iran’s missile and nuclear capabilities are destroyed carries far-reaching implications, both immediate and long-term:

1. Prolonged Regional Instability
By framing the war as open-ended and goal-driven rather than timeline-driven, Israel is preparing for a prolonged military campaign. This raises the risk of drawing in regional actors like Hezbollah in Lebanon, Shiite militias in Iraq, and even Houthi forces in Yemen. With Iran’s network of proxies, retaliation could unfold across multiple fronts.

2. Escalation of Iranian Retaliation
Iran has already launched hundreds of ballistic and cruise missiles at Israeli targets. As Israeli strikes continue to decimate critical infrastructure and personnel—including reported hits on missile silos and nuclear scientists—Iran may turn to more desperate or unconventional methods, including cyber warfare and potential attacks on U.S. bases or allies.

3. Diplomatic Fallout and Global Tensions
The declaration effectively nullifies hopes for renewed U.S.-Iran diplomacy or nuclear deal talks. It could also divide Western alliances, with some European states likely to call for de-escalation while others align behind Israel’s right to self-defense. The Gulf states may quietly support Israel’s aims but remain cautious about full-throated endorsement.

4. Strategic Precedent for Preemptive Doctrine
This campaign reinforces Israel’s long-held Begin Doctrine, which justifies preemptive strikes to prevent hostile states from acquiring weapons of mass destruction. Its application here sets a precedent that may influence how future conflicts involving emerging nuclear powers are managed—particularly in regions like the Korean Peninsula or South Asia.

5. Humanitarian and Economic Costs
A drawn-out war will heighten humanitarian suffering, not only within Iran but potentially in neighboring states. Oil markets may react with volatility, and shipping routes through the Strait of Hormuz—responsible for a significant share of global oil—could face disruption, amplifying global inflation and supply chain stress.

 Overall Takeway:

Israel’s stated policy—to continue until missile and nuclear threats are eradicated—lays the groundwork for an extended effort with deep political, ethical, and strategic consequences. While immediate gains in airspace dominance and targeting infrastructure are evident, the real question is whether this military campaign can achieve long-term security—or whether it fosters conditions for a longer, more complex regional conflict.

SOURCES: BREITBART – IDF General: War Will Not End Until Missile, Nuclear Threat Destroyed

THE TIMES OF ISRAEL – IDF will not end Iran offensive until nuke and missile threats removed, senior general says