A top American general has been dismissed after his agency produced an intelligence report contradicting President Donald Trump’s claims about US air strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. Lieutenant General Jeffrey Kruse, head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, was removed from his post alongside two senior Navy officials in what insiders describe as the latest round of the Trump administration’s purge of military leadership. The move has raised alarms among lawmakers and defense analysts who warn of growing politicisation inside the Pentagon.
Read: Homelessness in Washington Climbs Despite Billions Spent on Housing
General Kruse Removed
Lieutenant General Jeffrey Kruse, who had led the Defense Intelligence Agency since early 2024, was fired on Friday without an official explanation. A senior defense official confirmed the move, stating only that Kruse “will no longer serve as DIA director.” Kruse previously served as an adviser for military affairs to the director of national intelligence and held senior roles in the fight against ISIL.
Also read: Restaurants Suffering in D.C. After Trump’s Police Takeover is Overstated, Analysts Say
Report on Iran Strikes
The firing follows a preliminary assessment by the DIA that contradicted Trump’s claims about June’s air strikes on Iran. While the president asserted the strikes had “totally destroyed” nuclear sites, the DIA found that Iran’s nuclear program had only been set back a few months. The report, widely circulated in US media, also drew criticism from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, further increasing political pressure.
Also read: Trump Expands National Guard Troops Across 19 States to Back ICE Crackdown
Other Pentagon Dismissals
Kruse’s removal was part of a broader shake-up at the Pentagon. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth also dismissed Vice Admiral Nancy Lacore, chief of the Navy Reserve, and Rear Admiral Milton Sands, head of Naval Special Warfare Command. Neither officer was given a reason for their removal. All three dismissals are seen as part of Trump’s demand for loyalty across the Defense Department.
Also read: Companies Pay Trump’s Allies Millions After He Threatens Their Business
Lawmakers Express Concern
US Senator Mark Warner, vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, warned: “The firing of yet another senior national security official underscores the Trump administration’s dangerous habit of treating intelligence as a loyalty test rather than a safeguard for our country.” Lawmakers from both parties have voiced unease about the increasing politicization of the traditionally apolitical US military.
Also read: Trump Threatens Military Action in Chicago and New York Over Rising Crime
Pattern of Military Purges
Since the beginning of Trump’s second term in January, several top-ranking officers have been removed, including General Charles “CQ” Brown, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Others dismissed this year include the chiefs of the US Navy and Coast Guard, the NSA director, the vice chief of staff of the Air Force, and multiple senior military lawyers. The Air Force chief also announced an unexpected early retirement, fueling speculation about pressure from the White House.
Also read: FBI Raids Trump’s Former Adviser John Bolton’s Home
Cuts to Military Leadership
Defense Secretary Hegseth has insisted the president is merely reshaping military leadership to fit his vision. Earlier this year, he ordered a 20 percent reduction in active-duty four-star generals and admirals, along with a 10 percent cut in the overall number of flag officers. Critics argue the move undermines military stability and readiness.
Also read: 55 Million US Visa Holders at Risk of Deportation Under Trump’s Sweeping Scrutiny
Security Clearances Revoked
The dismissals come just days after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard announced that she was revoking the security clearances of 37 current and former intelligence professionals on Trump’s orders. Gabbard also unveiled a sweeping overhaul of her office, cutting personnel by more than 40 percent by October 1, a move projected to save $700 million annually but viewed by critics as another effort to consolidate control over intelligence.