As it was the tenth day of the Israeli aggression against Iran, US President Donald Trump officially entered the war on Israel's side, after having actually entered it from the very first moment, but without an official announcement.

Trump announced early Sunday morning that US bombers had attacked three Iranian nuclear sites in Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordow.

Until we know the full truth in the future, the main observation is that Trump is greatly exaggerating the magnitude of the strike, and that Iran is greatly downplaying it. The result is that we cannot arrive at the truth until further notice, and we will continue to be subjected to propaganda statements from both sides. This is a characteristic of almost all wars, old and new, except for those that are decided by a knockout blow, similar to the American nuclear bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the summer of 1945.

Trump, after practicing his usual method of contradicting himself with his statements, and after greatly confusing Iran even before the start of the Israeli aggression on June 13, made the decision to attack, despite the fact that last Friday evening he had said he was giving Iran two weeks to decide on unconditional surrender and a complete halt to enrichment.

Trump announced early yesterday morning that the operation had been a resounding success, completely destroying the three sites, and that Iran no longer possessed the capability to become a nuclear power.

Trump also said that if Iran does not abandon its nuclear program, it will face future attacks that are much worse and much easier to achieve, and there are many targets remaining that we will pursue with speed, precision, and skill.

In contrast, the Iranian reaction was a severe downplay.

The best example of this was the statement by Hassan Abedini, the political director of the Iranian Broadcasting Corporation, who said that his country had evacuated the three nuclear sites some time ago, and that Iran had not suffered a major attack because the nuclear materials had been removed in advance.

Iran's Nuclear Peace Center said it had not detected any radioactive contamination or nuclear leakage, and reassured citizens that they could continue their normal lives near these sites.

An Iranian parliamentarian from Qom said the damage from Fordow was not serious, and urged Trump to increase the production of coffins for the return of his soldiers stationed in the region.

More than one Iranian official confirmed that the nuclear materials were removed from these sites before Israel launched its aggression and that life continues normally around these sites.

So the image before us reveals that Trump claims he has completely destroyed the Iranian nuclear program, and Iran responds by saying the program is intact and that what was destroyed was merely the opening of the tunnel at the Fordow facility, with the important part located at a depth of about 100 meters beneath a rocky mountain.

Given this contradiction between two different opinions, it is certain that it will be difficult for us to know the truth of what happened, perhaps for a long time, or until the political results of this military battle become clear.

If we remain confused between what Washington and Tel Aviv say and what Tehran denies, there is a third point of view between these two contradictory views.

This third view states that it is difficult to completely destroy the Fordow facility and other nuclear facilities with conventional weapons, because that would require a tactical nuclear bomb, not just deep-penetrating bombs.

Even if America and Israel were able to destroy these facilities and delay the nuclear project for years, that would not prevent Iran from retaining some enriched uranium, which could enable it in the future to manufacture nuclear bombs, even if it were small.

But the most important view from their perspective is that Iran now possesses the theoretical knowledge and complete enrichment cycle for its nuclear program. Consequently, the idea of possessing a nuclear bomb is not out of reach, unless Israel, the United States, and the West manage to completely overthrow the Iranian regime, which seems difficult at this point.

The American hype can be understood in light of Trump's personality, which tends to exaggerate and magnify all his actions. It may mean that he will be satisfied with this strike alone and convince Netanyahu to stop the war.

Iran's downplaying of the situation may be interpreted as indicating that Tehran does not want to escalate with the US, does not want to respond broadly to the strikes, and is instead absorbing the latest operation to rebuild and restore what was destroyed by the aggression and reach a political agreement.

These are all possibilities, and only the coming days will determine their validity.