You go in, and you take it out.
In a May 2026 interview with CBS News, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu offered a sweeping account of a nation at war on multiple fronts — against Iran's nuclear ambitions, Hezbollah's arsenal, and Hamas's refusal to disarm — while insisting that Israel has emerged stronger, not exhausted, from the ordeal. His words carried the weight of a leader who sees himself navigating not merely a regional conflict but a civilizational reckoning, one in which inaction, he argued, has always proven more dangerous than the risks of force. The interview revealed a man who believes history will judge restraint harshly, and who is already thinking about what kind of partnership — not dependency — Israel and America should build in the decades ahead.
- Iran's nuclear infrastructure has been struck but not dismantled — enriched uranium remains, enrichment sites still operate, and Netanyahu says the war cannot end until both are gone.
- Hamas shattered ceasefire terms by refusing to disarm, leaving Israel weighing whether to forcibly demilitarize Gaza itself while the international community declines to send troops.
- Hezbollah, once armed with 150,000 rockets, has lost over 90 percent of its arsenal but still holds Lebanon hostage, and Israel refuses any deal that leaves the group intact — even if Trump asks.
- Netanyahu rejects the warmonger label, invoking Churchill's warnings about Hitler and arguing that Israel's civilian casualty ratios are among the lowest in modern urban warfare history.
- On the information battlefield, Netanyahu admits Israel is losing — foreign bot farms and organic shifts in opinion among young Americans are eroding support, and Israel has been slow to fight back.
- Looking forward, Netanyahu proposes ending U.S. military aid to Israel within a decade, replacing it with an equal partnership in weapons development, intelligence, and missile defense.
Benjamin Netanyahu sat down with CBS News on May 10, 2026, and delivered a portrait of a conflict he insists is unfinished. Despite significant Israeli military achievements — degraded nuclear facilities, disrupted proxy networks, destroyed missile production sites — the Prime Minister was unambiguous: the war with Iran cannot end while enriched uranium remains on Iranian soil and enrichment sites stay operational. Asked how that uranium would be removed, he was blunt: "You go in, and you take it out."
Netanyahu traced the roots of the current campaign to conversations with Donald Trump stretching back to 2016, when Trump first told him Iran could never be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. By early 2026, with Iran close enough to the bomb that waiting became untenable, the two leaders agreed in a February White House meeting that military strikes were necessary. Netanyahu acknowledged uncertainty and danger in that decision — but argued the greater danger lay in doing nothing.
The Iranian regime, he said, is now at its weakest since the 1979 revolution. Infrastructure feeding its weapons programs has been destroyed. Internal fractures are visible. Yet he cautioned that weakness is not defeat — the regime still controls enough of its security apparatus to survive, and whether it ultimately falls cannot be predicted. "It's like bankruptcy," he said. "It proceeds gradually, and then it falls."
On Lebanon, Netanyahu described a different stalemate. Israeli operations destroyed more than 90 percent of Hezbollah's 150,000-rocket arsenal, but thousands of missiles remain and the group still holds Lebanon hostage. Israel has established a security belt in southern Lebanon and is in discussions with the Lebanese government about finishing the job together. Iran, he noted, wants any ceasefire with Iran linked to one with Hezbollah. Israel refuses — unconditionally.
In Gaza, Netanyahu acknowledged two of four goals achieved: weapons smuggling through the Philadelphia Corridor has been curtailed, and weapons factories reduced. But Hamas refused to disarm, violating ceasefire terms. Netanyahu invited the international community to send troops to do the job. He is still waiting for volunteers. If none come, Israel will act — on its own timeline.
He pushed back against the warmonger label with force, invoking Churchill's warnings about Hitler in the 1930s and noting that Iran's leaders openly declare their intention to destroy both Israel and America. He acknowledged civilian casualties in Gaza and Lebanon but argued Israel's combatant-to-noncombatant ratios are among the lowest in modern urban warfare, and that no army has gone to greater lengths to warn civilians before strikes.
Looking ahead, Netanyahu proposed ending U.S. military aid to Israel over the next decade — not out of rupture, but maturity. Israel's economy is thriving even amid war; its currency is at a fifty-year high. He envisions a partnership of equals in intelligence, weapons development, and missile defense, mirroring a transition he began in 1996 when he weaned Israel off financial aid.
He closed with a candid admission: Israel is losing the social media war. Young Americans, shaped by images and narratives far removed from his account, are turning against Israel. Foreign bot farms are part of the problem, but not all of it. Netanyahu acknowledged that some Americans have arrived at their views through genuine inquiry. Israel, he said, has been fighting on seven military fronts while leaving the eighth — the battle for hearts and minds — almost entirely uncontested. That, he believes, must change.
Benjamin Netanyahu sat down with CBS News correspondent Major Garrett on May 10, 2026, and made clear that despite months of military operations against Iran, the conflict is far from finished. The Israeli Prime Minister acknowledged significant achievements—degraded nuclear facilities, damaged missile production sites, disrupted proxy networks—but insisted the war cannot end until Iran's enriched uranium is removed, its enrichment sites dismantled, and its ability to support militant groups like Hezbollah is eliminated. When pressed on how that uranium would be extracted, Netanyahu offered a characteristically blunt answer: "You go in, and you take it out." He declined to elaborate on military methods, but made plain that both he and President Trump understood the stakes and were prepared to use force again if necessary.
The conversation revealed the calculus driving Israeli strategy. Netanyahu traced his discussions with Trump back to 2016, when the then-candidate first told him in Trump Tower that Iran could not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. Eight years later, at Mar-a-Lago, Trump repeated the same commitment before Netanyahu even sat down. What changed between those two meetings, Netanyahu explained, was not Trump's resolve but Iran's proximity to the bomb. Sanctions had slowed the program but not stopped it. By early 2026, Iran was close enough that action became unavoidable. Netanyahu and Trump agreed in a February White House meeting that military strikes were necessary, though Netanyahu pushed back against reports that he had promised certain victory. "There was uncertainty," he said. "We both understood there was danger in action. But there's greater danger in not taking action."
The Iranian regime, Netanyahu argued, is now at its weakest point since the 1979 revolution. The military strikes destroyed petrochemical plants, steel mills, and the infrastructure that fed Iran's weapons programs. The regime's supreme leader, he suggested, is isolated and weakened, his authority diminished. Internal fissures have opened—some hardliners want to continue the fight, others fear economic collapse and popular uprising. Israeli intelligence operatives have detected street protests and signs of delegitimacy. Yet weakness is not the same as defeat. The regime still controls security forces willing to massacre civilians. It still holds the loyalty of enough of the state apparatus to survive. Whether it will ultimately fall, Netanyahu said, cannot be predicted. "It's like bankruptcy," he offered. "It proceeds gradually, and then it falls." The Soviet Union's collapse surprised everyone. So did the fall of Romania's Ceaușescu. Iran's regime could follow, but there is no guarantee.
On the second front—Lebanon and Hezbollah—Netanyahu described a different kind of stalemate. Hezbollah possessed 150,000 rockets and ballistic missiles before the war, the densest concentration of such weapons on the planet, all aimed at Israeli cities. Israeli operations destroyed more than 90 percent of that arsenal. But thousands of rockets and some ballistic missiles remain, and Hezbollah still holds Lebanon hostage. Netanyahu said Israel has no quarrel with the Lebanese people and would make peace tomorrow, but a foreign terrorist organization backed by Iran has hijacked the country. The Lebanese government, historically weak, cannot or will not confront Hezbollah. So Israel has moved into Lebanon to prevent a repeat of October 7th—when Hamas invaded from Gaza and committed what Netanyahu called the worst massacre against the Jewish people since the Holocaust. Hezbollah had 5,000 fighters ready to invade the Galilee. Israel pushed them back and established a security belt. But the work is incomplete. Many Lebanese, Netanyahu said, want Hezbollah eradicated. They lack the capacity to do it themselves. Israel is discussing with the Lebanese government how to work together militarily and politically to finish the job.
Iran, Netanyahu made clear, wants to link any ceasefire with Iran to a ceasefire with Hezbollah. Israel refuses. Even if President Trump asked, Netanyahu said, Israel would not accept a deal that leaves Hezbollah in place to continue tormenting Lebanon and threatening Israeli communities. He drew a parallel to Garrett's own neighborhood in Washington: Would Americans tolerate a terrorist organization claiming to want to destroy the United States, armed with missiles and drones, sitting just across a municipal border? Of course not. Yet that is what Israel faces daily. If the Iranian regime weakens or falls, Netanyahu suggested, the entire proxy network—Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis—could collapse with it. The scaffolding holding up Iran's terrorist infrastructure would crumble. But that outcome is not guaranteed, and the path to it remains long.
On Gaza, Netanyahu acknowledged that two of four key goals have been achieved. Israel has curtailed weapons smuggling by controlling the Philadelphia Corridor between Gaza and the Sinai. It has reduced weapons factories. But Hamas has refused to disarm and demilitarize, violating the terms of the ceasefire agreement. Netanyahu said someone must now do the job Hamas promised to do itself. He invited the international community to send troops to Gaza to disarm the militants. When Garrett asked who would do that, Netanyahu smiled slightly and said he was still waiting for volunteers. If no one steps forward, Israel will do it, but on its own timeline and terms. He emphasized that he is not eager for more fighting. He has been to war, seen friends die, lost his brother in a hostage rescue operation. But Israel will not allow Hamas to threaten it again.
Netanyahu pushed back hard against the characterization of him as a warmonger. Before October 7th, he said, he was considered perhaps the most restrained prime minister in Israeli history. He conducted three operations in Gaza but refused to send ground forces except to deal with tunnels. That changed when the Iran axis tried to annihilate Israel through a coordinated assault. Then restraint became impossible. He invoked Churchill, who was labeled a warmonger in the 1930s for warning against Hitler—and Hitler did not even publicly call for the destruction of Britain. Iran's leaders openly declare their intention to destroy both Israel and America. The comparison, in Netanyahu's view, is apt. He acknowledged that Israel has made mistakes in Gaza and Lebanon, that civilians have died in operations that were not always perfectly executed. But he insisted that no army in history has gone to greater lengths to minimize civilian casualties. Israel sends text messages and makes phone calls warning civilians to evacuate. Hamas and Hezbollah, by contrast, deliberately keep their own people in harm's way to generate casualties they can broadcast. The ratio of combatants to noncombatants in Israeli operations, Netanyahu argued, is among the lowest in modern urban warfare.
Looking ahead, Netanyahu proposed a significant shift in the Israeli-American relationship. He wants to end U.S. military aid to Israel over the next decade, moving from aid to partnership. Israel's economy has thrived even during three years of war. Its currency is the strongest it has been in fifty years. Its stock market is among the world's leading markets. Israel is a high-tech powerhouse, one of only two global centers for breakthrough technologies. It no longer needs American financial support. Instead, Netanyahu proposed joint projects in intelligence, weapons development, and missile defense—areas where Israel leads the world. Both countries would contribute equally and share the fruits. He has already begun this transition once before, in 1996, when he proposed weaning Israel off financial aid as it became a free-market economy. His advisors thought he was mad. But it worked. Now he wants to do the same on the military side. The change could happen quickly, Netanyahu said, but he wants to start now, not wait for the next Congress.
On the broader question of Israel's place in the world, Netanyahu expressed confidence that the country has emerged as the most powerful force in the Middle East. The Abraham Accords, which he helped negotiate with Trump, brought four Arab states into formal relations with Israel. More are possible. The Gulf states, despite some private concerns about Iranian retaliation and Israeli dominance, are increasingly interested in deepening ties with Israel. They see value in Israeli technology, Israeli defense capabilities, Israeli expertise in AI and quantum computing. The fact that Israel faced down the Iranian bully and survived has brought Arab countries closer together with Israel. That is good for peace. But Netanyahu also acknowledged that the social media war is being lost. Young Americans, both Republican and Democrat, are turning against Israel, scrolling through images that tell a story very different from his. Foreign bot farms, he said, are manipulating social media to break American sympathy for Israel and damage the American-Israeli alliance. But he also conceded that some Americans have come to different views of Israel organically, through their own inquiry, not just through propaganda. Israel has been slow to fight back on this front. While conducting military operations on seven battlefields, it has been completely exposed on an eighth front—the media and social media war. That must change. Israel must engage in that battle, not through censorship but through finding ways applicable to democracies to fight for the hearts and minds of young Americans. It is a problem Netanyahu recognizes and one he believes Israel must address.
Citas Notables
It's not over, because there's still nuclear material, enriched uranium that has to be taken out of Iran. There are still enrichment sites that have to be dismantled.— Netanyahu on why the war with Iran continues
The danger is in action, in taking action. But there's greater danger in not taking action.— Netanyahu on the February White House meeting with Trump
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
You say the war with Iran isn't over, but you've degraded their nuclear program significantly. What would actually constitute victory for you?
Victory means Iran cannot threaten us with nuclear weapons. It means their enrichment sites are gone, their uranium is removed, their ability to produce a bomb is eliminated. We've set them back, but they're still dangerous. They could rebuild.
And if they refuse to give up that material voluntarily?
Then we take it. We have the capability. The question is whether we can achieve it through pressure and agreement first. That's always preferable. But we won't accept a nuclear Iran.
You mentioned the regime is weakened but not defeated. How do you know when it's actually fallen?
You can't predict it. The Soviet Union fell suddenly after decades of apparent stability. Romania's dictatorship collapsed overnight. But weakness creates opportunity. When people see their government is not invincible, when they see their economy collapsing, they begin to resist. We've created those conditions. What happens next depends on many things we cannot control.
On Gaza, you say Hamas violated the ceasefire by refusing to disarm. But you also say Israel may need to do the disarming. Doesn't that mean the ceasefire has failed?
The ceasefire was meant to be a pathway to permanent peace. Hamas was supposed to voluntarily give up its weapons. They refused. So yes, the agreement has failed on that point. But we achieved other goals—we cut off their supply lines, we reduced their weapons factories. The question now is whether we force the issue or wait.
And if you force it, doesn't that restart the war in Gaza?
Possibly. But we cannot allow Hamas to remain armed and threatening our people. We'll choose the time and circumstances. We're not eager for more fighting. But we won't accept Hamas as a permanent armed force in Gaza either.
You want to end American military aid to Israel. Why would you give that up when you're still fighting on multiple fronts?
Because Israel has come of age. We have a strong economy, advanced technology, talented people. We don't need the aid anymore. What we need is partnership—joint projects, shared intelligence, mutual defense. That's a stronger relationship than aid. It treats Israel as an equal, not a dependent.