2026年4月5日 / 美国东部时间上午9:13 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
美军战机在伊朗上空低空慢速飞行，搜寻一名被击落的飞行员，并遭到地面火力攻击。据一名美国官员和一名白宫官员透露，这名飞行员已于当地时间周日清晨获救。但美国正更深地卷入战事，这位美军最高统帅还发布了打击行动视频，语气比以往任何时候都更具好战色彩。
“我们会把他们打回他们本该待的石器时代，”特朗普总统周三说道。
截至目前，美军的打击目标主要是军事设施（如一处弹药库），但也击中了伊朗最大的桥梁——一座民用目标——美国官员称该桥梁曾被用于运输导弹。
总统威胁称，如果伊朗不在周一晚间之前接受协议，美方将发动更猛烈的打击。特朗普在周三的全国电视讲话中表示：“如果无法达成协议，我们将对他们的每一座发电厂施以重击，而且很可能同时发起打击。”
“发电厂为医院、学校和供水净化设施提供电力，这些都是平民维持日常基本生活所需的基础设施，”曾担任奥巴马政府国家安全委员会法律顾问的泰斯·布里奇曼说道，“摧毁所有发电厂，以胁迫平民 population 来迫使一个政府坐到谈判桌前，这类行为完全是非法的。”
曾在首届特朗普政府担任伊朗问题特别代表的埃利奥特·艾布拉姆斯表示，惩罚伊朗民众会损害美国的目标。“我们希望伊朗民众站在我们这边，”他说，“我更希望我们瞄准政权目标，也就是他们用来镇压伊朗民众的资产，而非伊朗民众维持日常生活的资产。”
这似乎也与特朗普总统开战的初衷相去甚远：确保伊朗不会制造核武器。
他是否达成了这一目标？“不幸的是，没有，”国际科学与安全研究所所长、伊朗核问题顶尖专家戴维·奥尔布赖特说道，他表示伊朗的核计划已遭受严重挫折。“目前仍留存的最关键部分是高浓缩铀，而美国或以色列并未将其摧毁或带走。”
奥尔布赖特指出，只要伊朗拥有高浓缩铀，就具备制造核武器的途径。
据悉，伊朗一半的高浓缩铀被埋在伊斯法罕的山地综合体中——而特朗普总统似乎打算放任其留在那里，他声称：“我们正对其进行严密的卫星监视和管控。如果我们看到他们有任何动作，哪怕只是想动用这批铀，我们也会再次用导弹施以重击。”
美军可以轰炸该山地综合体，使铀的获取难度进一步加大，但这并非全部库存。“剩余的铀藏在哪里是个大问题，因为剩余的高浓缩铀至少足以制造两三枚核弹，”奥尔布赖特说道。
艾布拉姆斯表示，这场战争很可能会让伊朗更坚定，而非更不坚定地追求核弹：“我认为这场战争让他们意识到，他们需要拥有核武器，”他说，“我认为他们不会明天就这么做。我认为如果现政权得以存续，他们会在未来重拾这一计划。”
当被问及伊朗的核计划是否会就此终结时，奥尔布赖特回应道：“就目前的事态发展来看，我认为我们看不到它的终结。”
更多信息来源：
- 泰斯·布里奇曼，《公正安全》联合主编
- 埃利奥特·艾布拉姆斯，外交关系委员会中东研究高级研究员
- 戴维·奥尔布赖特，国际科学与安全研究所所长
本文由玛丽·拉法利制作。编辑：劳伦·巴内洛。
U.S. drawn deeper into war, as Trump calls for Iran to accept a deal
April 5, 2026 / 9:13 AM EDT / CBS News
American aircraft flying low and slow over Iran searched for a downed aviator and took fire from the ground. The airman was rescued early Sunday morning local time, according to a U.S. official and a White House official. But the U.S. is being drawn deeper in, and the commander-in-chief is posting strike videos – while sounding more bellicose than ever.
“We’re going to bring them back to the stone ages, where they belong,” President Trump said Wednesday.
So far, the U.S. has struck mostly military targets (like an ammunition depot), but it also hit Iran’s biggest bridge – a civilian target – which U.S. officials said was used to transport missiles.
The president threatened much worse if Iran does not come to terms by Monday night. In his address to the nation Wednesday, Mr. Trump said, “If there is no deal, we are going to hit each and every one of their electric generating plants very hard and probably simultaneously.”
“Electrical generating plants power hospitals, they power schools, water sanitation facilities, the things that you need to sustain basic day-to-day living for a civilian population,” said Tess Bridgeman, who was a legal adviser to President Obama’s National Security Council. “Obliterating all power plants, threatening coercive actions against the civilian population to try to bring a government to the negotiating table, those kinds of things are flatly illegal.”
Elliott Abrams, who served as special representative for Iran in the first Trump administration, says punishing the Iranian population would undercut the American cause. “We want the Iranian people on our side,” he said. “I’d rather see us go after regime targets, assets they use to repress the Iranian people, not assets Iranians use to live their daily lives.”
It also seems far removed from the reason President Trump went to war: to make sure Iran does not build a nuclear weapon.
Has he done that? “Unfortunately not,” said David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, and a leading expert on Iran’s nuclear program, which he says has been seriously set back. “The most important part that remains is the highly-enriched uranium, and that has not been destroyed or taken by the United States or Israel.”
Albright says that, as long as Iran has highly-enriched uranium, it has a path to a nuclear weapon.
Half of Iran’s highly-enriched uranium is believed buried inside the Isfahan mountain complex – and President Trump seems willing to leave it there, claiming, “We have it under intense satellite surveillance and control. If we see them make a move, even a move for it, we’ll hit them with missiles very hard again.”
The U.S. can bomb the complex to make the uranium even harder to get to, but that is not the entire stockpile. “It’s a big question about where is the rest, because the rest is enough for at least two or three nuclear weapons,” Albright said.
Abrams says the war will likely leave Iran more determined, not less determined, to get a bomb: “I think the war leads them to believe that they need a nuclear weapon,” he said. “I don’t think they’re going to do this tomorrow morning. I think they’ll return to it over time, if the regime survives.”
Asked if we have seen the last of Iran’s nuclear program, Albright replied, “The way things are going now, I don’t think we’re going to see the end of it.”
For more info:
- Tess Bridgeman, co-editor-in-chief, Just Security
- Elliott Abrams, senior fellow for Middle Eastern Studies, Council on Foreign Relations
- David Albright, president, Institute for Science and InternationalSecurity
Story produced by Mary Raffalli. Editor: Lauren Barnello.