Trump ‘Furious’ After Israeli Strike on Iranian Oil Facilities Sparks Market Turmoil

President Donald J. Trump was reportedly frustrated over the weekend after Israeli forces launched strikes on Iranian oil infrastructure near Tehran, an operation that triggered massive fires, rattled energy markets, and revealed emerging tensions within the U.S.–Israeli alliance.

According to a report from Axios, Israeli aircraft targeted oil storage depots and a refinery around Tehran in strikes that allegedly went “far beyond what the U.S. expected.” Israeli officials had reportedly notified Washington ahead of time and argued the sites were tied to fueling missile launches, but American officials were still surprised by the scale of the operation.

One U.S. official told Axios the strikes were more “wide-ranging” than anticipated and added bluntly, “We don’t think it was a good idea.” An Israeli official described the response from Washington even more starkly, saying the message from U.S. officials amounted to: “WTF.”

Neither the White House nor the Israel Defense Forces publicly confirmed the exchange. Still, the report points to what may be the first visible strain in coordination between Washington and Jerusalem since the war escalated on February 28 under Operation Epic Fury.

The strikes created dramatic scenes across Tehran. Videos circulating online showed towering flames and thick plumes of black smoke rising from industrial areas. Iranian authorities urged residents to remain indoors as damaged fuel facilities reportedly leaked petroleum that ignited across surrounding areas.

Local accounts described oil runoff catching fire in nearby streets, while residents reported darkened rainfall mixed with soot and residue falling across parts of the city.

A Trump adviser told Axios the president’s concerns extended beyond military strategy to the economic ripple effects.

“The president doesn’t like the attack. He wants to save the oil. He doesn’t want to burn it. And it reminds people of higher gas prices,” the adviser said.

The remarks reflect a delicate balancing act inside the administration’s strategy: maintaining maximum pressure on Tehran’s military capabilities while avoiding moves that could ignite a broader regional crisis or destabilize global energy markets.

Energy infrastructure is widely considered one of the most sensitive target categories in modern warfare because strikes on oil facilities can quickly ripple through global supply chains and domestic fuel prices.

Iran responded by warning it has so far refrained from targeting energy infrastructure across the region but could change course if the conflict escalates further. A military spokesperson suggested crude oil prices could surge to $200 per barrel if production facilities or key shipping routes — particularly the Strait of Hormuz — become direct targets.

The narrow waterway handles a large share of the world’s oil shipments and has long been viewed as a potential flashpoint during tensions between Iran and Western allies.

Despite the alarming rhetoric, markets began stabilizing by Monday evening and Tuesday morning. Bloomberg reported that oil prices fell as much as 12 percent after world leaders signaled they were prepared to intervene to prevent supply disruptions.

The International Energy Agency convened an “extraordinary meeting” to evaluate the situation, while the Group of Seven asked the agency to prepare scenarios for a coordinated release of emergency oil reserves if necessary.

The rapid market swings underscored how volatile global energy markets have become as the conflict unfolds.

Strategically, the oil facility strikes may also carry political risks inside Iran. While opposition to the regime remains widespread, attacks on critical economic infrastructure sometimes produce a nationalist backlash — even among citizens who oppose the ruling government.

U.S. officials are reportedly wary of actions that could unintentionally strengthen domestic support for Tehran’s leadership.

The episode highlights the complex challenge of managing coalition warfare among close allies. Israeli leaders may view oil infrastructure as legitimate military targets linked to missile operations. Washington, however, appears more focused on escalation risks, global energy stability, and domestic economic consequences.

Since the start of the conflict, President Trump has emphasized a strategy focused on degrading Iran’s military capabilities while preventing the conflict from spiraling into a prolonged regional war.

The oil facility strikes threaten to complicate that approach.

Although the White House has not publicly rebuked Israel, reports of private frustration suggest ongoing internal debate within the U.S. alliance about how far the campaign against Iran should extend — particularly when it comes to targeting economic infrastructure.