Americans disapprove of the strikes, 56% to 44%, according to the survey, with strong disapproval outpacing the share who strongly approve. Most distrust Trump’s decision-making on the use of force in Iran, with about 6 in 10 worried that the strikes will increase the Iranian threat to the US.

Sharp partisan divides cut through nearly every question asked in the survey: Democrats are broadly opposed to the strikes as most Republicans support them, though younger GOP supporters and Republican-leaning independents are more skeptical than others in their party.

Majorities of independents (60%) and Democrats (88%) disapprove of the decision to take military action in Iran. Republicans largely approve (82%). But just 44% of Republicans strongly approve of the airstrikes, far smaller than the group of Democrats who strongly disapprove (60%), perhaps reflecting that some in Trump’s coalition are broadly distrustful of military action abroad.

A 58% majority overall say the strikes will make Iran more of a threat to the US, with just 27% believing it will lessen the threat and the rest expecting it to do neither. Even among those who support the strikes, just 55% expect them to lessen the threat level.

And few say the US made enough of an effort at diplomacy before using military force: 32% feel the US did enough, 39% that it did not and 29% are unsure.

The poll was conducted Sunday and Monday, with nearly all of the interviews completed before Iran launched retaliatory strikes Monday against US air bases and all interviews done before Trump’s subsequent announcement of a ceasefire.

Just over half of Americans, 55%, expresses little or no trust in Trump to make the right decisions about the US use of force in Iran, with 45% saying they trust him moderately or a great deal. And most – 65% – say that he should be required to get congressional approval for any further military action, with 21% saying he should not.

Mistrust of Trump’s judgment is especially high among Democrats (88% of whom express little or no trust) and independents (62%), who also broadly say the president should be required to get congressional approval for any further military action in Iran (88% of Democrats and 67% of independents feel that way).

Republicans express more trust in the president, although that trust is also somewhat tempered: 51% say they have a great deal of trust in him to make the right decisions on the use of force with Iran, 37% a moderate amount. And the GOP divides over whether Trump ought to be required to get congressional approval for further action, with 39% saying he should be required to do so, 38% that he should not and 23% are not sure.

Americans younger than 35 are more likely than any other age group to disapprove of the military action in Iran (68% disapprove). They also express the broadest skepticism about Trump: They are the most likely of any age group to say they have no trust at all in Trump’s ability to make the right decisions about US use of force in Iran (45% feel that way) and to say he ought to be required to get congressional approval before taking further military action (73%).

That skepticism is partly driven by younger Republicans and Republican-leaning independents. Just 20% of Republican-aligned Americans younger than 45 say they strongly approve of the decision to carry out airstrikes, compared with 53% among older Republican-aligned Americans. Younger Republicans are about 20 points more likely than older adults aligned with the party to believe the strikes increase the threat to the US from Iran and are 26 points less likely to have a great deal of trust in Trump’s decision-making on the use of force in Iran.

Overall, there’s almost no public appetite for sending ground troops into Iran, with just 9% in favor, and 68% opposed, with the remaining 23% unsure. Even those who support the airstrikes against Iran oppose sending in ground troops by a more than 2-to-1 margin.

The share of Americans who offer no opinion when given the choice to do suggests that public opinion hasn’t yet fully settled in the wake of a rapidly evolving situation. While the vast majority, 8 in 10, say they’ve been following news about America’s strikes at least somewhat closely, only about one-third say they’ve followed the news very closely.

The assessment, which has not been previously reported, was produced by the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Pentagon’s intelligence arm. It is based on a battle damage assessment conducted by US Central Command in the aftermath of the US raids, one of the sources said, CNN reported.

The analysis of the damage to the sites and the impact of the strikes on Iran’s nuclear program is ongoing, and could change as more intelligence becomes available.

But the early findings are at odds with President Donald Trump’s repeated claims that the strikes “completely and totally obliterated” Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth also claimed on Sunday that Iran’s nuclear program “have been obliterated”.

Two of the people familiar with the assessment said Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium was not destroyed. One of the people added the centrifuges are largely “intact”.

Another source stated that the intelligence assessed enriched uranium was moved out of the sites prior to the US attacks, noting, “So the (DIA) assessment is that the US set them back maybe a few months, tops.”

The White House acknowledged the existence of the assessment but announced they disagreed with it.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told CNN in a statement, “This alleged assessment is flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked to CNN by an anonymous, low-level loser in the intelligence community. The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program. Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000 pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration.”

Trump, who’s in the Netherlands attending this week’s NATO summit, pushed back on CNN’s report in a Truth Social post.

“One of the most successful military strikes in history,” Trump wrote in the all-caps post adding, “The nuclear sites in Iran are completely destroyed!”

The US military has claimed the operation went as planned and that it was an “overwhelming success”.

It is still early for the US to have a comprehensive picture of the impact of the strikes, and none of the sources described how the DIA assessment compares to the view of other agencies in the intelligence community. The US is continuing to pick up intelligence, including from within Iran as they assess the damage.

Israel had been carrying out strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities for days leading up to the US military operation but claimed to need the US’ 30,000-pound bunker buster bombs to finish the job. While US B-2 bombers dropped over a dozen of the bombs on two of the nuclear sites, the Fordow Fuel Enrichment plant and the Natanz Enrichment Complex, the bombs did not fully eliminate the sites’ centrifuges and highly enriched uranium, according to the people familiar with the assessment.

Instead, the impact to all three sites — Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan — was largely restricted to aboveground structures, which were severely damaged, the sources claimed. That includes the sites’ power infrastructure and some of the aboveground facilities.

Hegseth also told CNN, “Based on everything we have seen — and I’ve seen it all — our bombing campaign obliterated Iran’s ability to create nuclear weapons. Our massive bombs hit exactly the right spot at each target and worked perfectly. The impact of those bombs is buried under a mountain of rubble in Iran; so anyone who says the bombs were not devastating is just trying to undermine the President and the successful mission.“

On Tuesday morning, Trump repeated his belief the damage from the attacks was significant.

“I think it’s been completely demolished,” he claimed, adding, “Those pilots hit their targets. Those targets were obliterated, and the pilots should be given credit.”

Asked about the possibility of Iran rebuilding its nuclear program, Trump responded, “That place is under rock. That place is demolished.”

While Trump and Hegseth have been bullish about the success of the strikes, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine stated Sunday that while the damage assessment was still ongoing it would be “way too early” to comment on whether Iran still retains some nuclear capabilities.

Earlier on Tuesday, classified briefings for both the House and Senate on the operation were canceled.

As CNN has reported, there have long been questions about whether the US’ bunker-buster bombs, known as Massive Ordnance Penetrators, would be able to fully destroy Iran’s highly fortified nuclear sites that are buried deep underground — particularly at Fordow and Isfahan, Iran’s largest nuclear research complex.

Notably, the US struck Isfahan with Tomahawk missiles launched from a submarine instead of a bunker-buster bomb. That is because there was an understanding that the bomb would likely not successfully penetrate Isfahan’s lower levels, which are buried even deeper than Fordow, one of the sources stated.