‘I can’t sleep’: Former Trump ally sparks alarm with warning about possible nuclear strike

The war between the United States and Iran has already strained international relations and raised concerns about how far the conflict could escalate. Now, a warning from a prominent figure in American conservative media has brought the possibility of nuclear warfare into the political debate.

President Donald Trump has faced growing criticism over his administration’s military campaign against Iran, including from conservatives who previously supported him.

Among his most outspoken critics is Tucker Carlson, the former Fox News host who was once a close political ally of the president.

Carlson has increasingly distanced himself from Trump over the war, arguing against further American military involvement in the Middle East.

But his latest intervention goes considerably further than his previous criticism.

In a statement published Sunday night, Carlson claimed that Trump could be approaching a decision on whether to authorize a nuclear strike against an Iranian nuclear facility.

The extraordinary allegation, which has not been independently verified, quickly attracted attention from journalists, political figures and military analysts.

And for some observers, the prospect was disturbing enough to keep them awake.

Tucker Carlson claims a decision could be days away

Carlson’s warning centered on his belief that the Trump administration is considering an unprecedented escalation of its military campaign.

According to the conservative commentator, people familiar with the situation believe the president may decide whether to use a nuclear weapon against Iran before the end of the coming weekend.

Carlson claimed that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was encouraging the United States to take such action.

He suggested that Netanyahu, facing domestic political pressure following an electoral setback, was seeking a dramatic escalation of the conflict.

Those assertions remain unverified, and the material cited by Carlson does not establish that Trump has approved, or even formally considered, a nuclear strike.

Nevertheless, the former Trump ally presented his warning in stark terms.

“We’ve been sleepwalking toward this moment for months,” Carlson wrote.

He also alleged that changes to American nuclear policy had made the possibility of using smaller nuclear weapons more realistic.

“Since February, the administration has quietly rewritten America’s nuclear doctrine to make first use of so-called ‘battlefield nukes’ easier and therefore more likely. No one in Washington in either party seems bothered by this. Now we’re on the brink of it.”

The claim about changes to nuclear doctrine requires separate scrutiny and does not, by itself, demonstrate that an attack is being planned.

By Monday morning, Carlson’s statement had reportedly attracted more than 34 million views on social media.

Hunter Biden responds with a chilling message

The warning quickly reached figures far beyond Carlson’s usual conservative audience.

Hunter Biden, the son of former President Joe Biden, reacted to the allegations in a short post on X late Sunday.

“Now I can’t sleep,” he wrote.

His response captured the anxiety surrounding Carlson’s claims, particularly given the potentially catastrophic consequences of nuclear weapons being used in an active conflict.

Journalist Ryan Grim, founder of Drop Site News, also urged people not to dismiss the warning simply because it came from Carlson.

“Tucker is extremely well sourced in the Trump administration and shouldn’t be ignored if this is what he’s being told,” Grim wrote.

Carlson has maintained relationships with figures in Trump’s political circle, although the extent and reliability of his information in this particular case remain unclear.

Neither his past connections nor the public reaction provides independent confirmation of the alleged nuclear plans.

An Iranian mountain facility is at the center of the allegations

The potential target identified by Carlson is Pickaxe Mountain, an underground facility in Iran that has attracted attention from American and Israeli officials.

Israeli intelligence has reportedly assessed that Iran may have moved nuclear centrifuges into the facility as part of efforts to rebuild its nuclear program.

Trump has also referred to the location publicly.

According to Carlson, the administration could be considering a nuclear weapon to attack the fortified site.

Such an operation would carry risks far beyond the immediate military target.

Carlson warned that a nuclear explosion at the facility could spread radioactive contamination throughout the surrounding region.

“Fallout from a ground explosion at Pickaxe Mountain would contaminate the Persian Gulf, poisoning the water supply for 100 million people,” he claimed.

He continued with an even more alarming prediction.

“And those are just some of the immediate consequences for the region. The rest of the world is every bit as exposed… After the first nuclear strike, World War Three is inevitable. That war would be short and final.”

Those projections are Carlson’s own warnings, not established scientific conclusions about a specific proposed attack.

The actual consequences of a nuclear detonation would depend on factors including the weapon’s yield, the location and depth of the explosion, weather conditions and the extent of radioactive material released.

Similarly, a wider international war would be a possible escalation risk rather than an inevitable outcome.

Former Republican lawmaker condemns the possibility

Carlson was not the only conservative figure expressing alarm.

Former Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene argued that a nuclear strike against Iran would amount to “crimes against humanity.”

Her criticism added to the opposition emerging from figures who have previously been associated with Trump’s political movement.

Geopolitical analyst Brett Erickson also warned that such an attack could “lead to global economic devastation.”

The concerns reflect the potentially enormous consequences of introducing nuclear weapons into a conventional military conflict.

Beyond the immediate destruction and humanitarian impact, nuclear use could trigger retaliation, destabilize regional alliances and undermine decades of international efforts to prevent nuclear escalation.

It could also fundamentally change how other nuclear-armed countries calculate the risks of using their own arsenals.

Military journalist warns of an irreversible precedent

Tyler Rogoway, editor-in-chief of the defense publication The War Zone, offered one of the strongest responses to Carlson’s claims.

His concern extended beyond the specific allegations involving Iran.

Rogoway argued that the use of any nuclear weapon in an ongoing conflict could destroy an international norm that has endured since the American atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

“If a nuclear weapon were used on Pickaxe Mountain in Iran by the US or Israel or an empty field in Ukraine by Russia etc, it doesn’t matter, it would open up Pandora’s box and would make the U.S. and the world dramatically less safe,” he wrote.

He also warned that American involvement in such an attack would represent an extraordinary foreign policy disaster.

“This isn’t even a question of how big of a disaster the use, in any manner, of a nuclear weapon would be. It would represent the largest foreign policy error ever by the United States if we were involved. We can only hope this claim isn’t accurate in any way.”

Rogoway’s comments focused on the broader strategic danger of breaking the nuclear taboo, regardless of which country carried out the attack.

His assessment also emphasized the uncertainty surrounding Carlson’s account.

This article is made and published by Nicolai H, who may have used AI in the preparation