Pete Hegseth on "60 Minutes."

CBS News chief Washington correspondent @MajorCBS sat down with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in Washington, D.C. They spoke on Friday, March 6th about the state of the war with Iran, potential American casualties, what an Iranian surrender could look like, and more.

Editor's… pic.twitter.com/JRnKcYs5IY

— 60 Minutes (@60Minutes) March 9, 2026

That's the "extended version" of what aired on the show last night. And it's helpful to see the transcript (which I generated using ChatGPT)(the boldface is mine):

Major Garrett: The speaker of the House said late this week, “The mission is,” and I'm quoting him directly here, “nearly accomplished by all estimates.” Is that true?

Pete Hegseth: Oh, we're very much on track, on plan. I was down at CENTCOM yesterday—

Major Garrett: Someone might hear that and think it's almost over—

Pete Hegseth: Well, there's no— we're not flying a mission accomplished banner— like George W. Bush on— on an aircraft carrier. We're not doing that and we haven't done that. But we can be clear with the American people that this is not a fair fight.

And that's on purpose. Our capabilities are overwhelming compared to what Iran's are. And frankly, when you combine our Air Force with the air force of the Israeli Defense Forces, it's the two most powerful air forces in the world.

The ability for us to be up over the top and hunting with more conventional munitions, gravity bombs, 500-pound, 1,000-pound, 2,000-pound bombs on military targets— that— we haven't even really begun to start that effort of the campaign, which is gonna showcase even more how— how we will execute on those objectives.

Major Garrett: The president said recently there will be no deal with Iran except unconditional surrender. What does that look like, unconditional surrender? How will you know it's real?

Pete Hegseth: It means we're fightin' to win. It means we set the terms. We'll know when they're not capable of fighting. There'll be a point where they'll have no choice but to do that. Whether they know it or not, they will be combat-ineffective. They will surrender.

Major Garrett: Typically the understanding of a surrender is person-to-person. Is that what would be required in a matter like this?

Pete Hegseth: Well, there's a lotta different ways. Whether they want to admit it or not, whether their pride lets them say it out loud or not— it's President Trump who will set the terms of that.

Major Garrett: There was a very long war between Iran and Iraq, almost eight years, and they never surrendered in that war. And I'm just wondering if that factors into your calculus or the president's calculus as well—

Pete Hegseth: I mean, there was a really long fight that I was a part of, that my generation was a part of.

Major Garrett: Yes. I know that, sir.

Pete Hegseth: In Iraq and Afghanistan— where a lot of foolish approaches were used. This is war. This is conflict. This is bringing your enemy to their knees. Now, whether they will have a ceremony in Tehran Square and surrender, that's up to them.

Major Garrett: There are varying versions of how and why the war started when it did. Some normally enthusiastic supporters of the president have criticized him suggesting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pulled the U.S. into a war that to their minds did not put American interests first. Do you want to address that criticism?

Pete Hegseth: All I know is, I'm in the room every day and I see how President Trump operates and what he's putting first, and it's America, Americans, and American interests.

Major Garrett: It has been said that the Israelis, through Benjamin Netanyahu, provided on February 23rd key information about intelligence they had developed about the likely whereabouts of Ali Khamenei and many in his inner circle. That the U.S. then checked it out through the CIA, confirmed that, and that was an opportunity that presented itself to the president. And that is the precipitating factor for this war. That's the way it's been reported. Is that accurate?

Pete Hegseth: President Trump's approach has been our interest in advancing those interests from the beginning. And so the fact that intelligence was gathered— whether from Israelis or ours— and always checked by our intel agencies to make sure it's accurate— a lotta times the best way to start operations is a trigger-based or condition-based moment. And you can work together on whether that makes sense. But we were always controlling the throttle about whether or not we go or not go.

Major Garrett: Some might look at that sequence of events and say, well, that it was an opportunity more than an imminent threat.

Pete Hegseth: I think much of that discussion is silly and academic. They've been killing us for 47 years. They have unabated nuclear ambitions.

Major Garrett: Is it possible to achieve the objectives President Trump has set before you if we don't locate and obtain and extract the highly enriched uranium?

Pete Hegseth: There's a lotta different ways we can get after that… As far as how you get at that nuclear option, we'll make sure that their nuclear ambitions are never achieved.

Major Garrett: Will we take it out ourselves?

Pete Hegseth: I would never tell you or anybody else what our options are.

Major Garrett: Do we have any overt or covert forces inside Iran now?

Pete Hegseth: I wouldn't tell you that if we did.

Major Garrett: Earlier this week you said no. Is that still the answer?

Pete Hegseth: Yeah, that's still the answer. But we reserve the right. We would be completely unwise if we did not reserve the right to take any particular option, whether it included boots on the ground or no boots on the ground.

Major Garrett: CBS News has three sources telling us that Russia is providing intelligence to Iran on U.S. positions and movements. The average American might hear that and think that's a big and dangerous deal. Is it?

Pete Hegseth: Well, we're tracking everything. Our commanders are aware of everything. We have the best intelligence in the world… the American people can rest assured their commander-in-chief is well aware of who's talking to who.

Major Garrett: Does this put U.S. personnel in any more danger than they otherwise would be?

Pete Hegseth: No one's putting us in danger. We're putting the other guys in danger, and that's our job. So we're not concerned about that… The only ones that need to be worried right now are Iranians that think they're gonna live.

Major Garrett: Have you made any conclusions about whether or not the United States, inadvertently or not, was involved in any military strike at that school?

Pete Hegseth: We're still investigating… But I will emphasize… unlike our adversaries, the Iranians, we never target civilians.

Major Garrett: There was a report late in the week from two officials that it was likely U.S. involvement. Is that report false?

Pete Hegseth: I've already said we're investigating.

Major Garrett: If you could tell the American public it definitively was not us, you would tell us, wouldn't you?

Pete Hegseth: I would say that it's being investigated, which is the only answer I'm prepared to give.

Major Garrett: You said this is not a regime-change war, but the regime has changed. Can you square the two?

Pete Hegseth: Sure. I meant what I said. It's not a regime-change war in a conventional George W. Bush context of hundreds of thousands of troops…

The hubris of “We're gonna take Afghanistan and turn it into a Jeffersonian democracy”— it was never gonna work…

But this is not a remaking of the Iranian society from an American perspective. We tried that. The American people have rejected that.

Major Garrett: President Trump also said this week he would like to protect some of the people who he would like to come to power in Iran. Is that a new mission for your department?

Pete Hegseth: No.

Major Garrett: How would you protect people that are inside the country that he might think could rise to the level of leadership there?

Pete Hegseth: The best way to protect them is what we're doing right now… This is a generational opportunity for the people of Iran.

Major Garrett: There's reporting that allies in the region are running very low on interceptors. How prepared are we to help them restock?

Pete Hegseth: Very prepared… where we can help allies, we will.

Major Garrett: The Strait of Hormuz will be “taken care of,” the president said. How?

Pete Hegseth: American firepower. The Iranian navy is largely no more. There'll be more boats to be sunk, for sure…

What I want your viewers to understand is this is only just the beginning.

I was struck by how intelligent and articulate Hegseth is and also by the twinkle in his eye. He seems to love what he is doing and to be charming us into loving it too.

That charges everyone up, friend and foe. Here's a quote from one foe: "Pete Hegseth is a very dangerous person. He’s a white Christian nationalist and has the arsenal of the United States government at his disposal and a permission slip from President Trump to deploy carnage wherever he wishes against whomever he wishes." That's Janessa Goldbeck, chief executive of Vet Voice Foundation, quoted in "'A very dangerous person': alarm as Pete Hegseth revels in carnage of Iran war" (The Guardian).

Goldbeck, a Marine Corps veteran who was deployed overseas as a combat engineer officer, commented: “I wish I could say how cavalier, obtuse and hopeless Secretary Hegseth is at leading the Pentagon. I can’t even muster the words to describe his self-adulation, matched only in scope by his apparent moral depravity.... Let’s not forget that Pete Hegseth is a former morning-show Fox News TV host, and has this cartoonish persona, speaking what he thinks is tough-guy language, but sounds to me as a veteran and to many of my peers who served in combat like somebody who is completely inept and pretending to have this macho persona. Honestly, it’s embarrassing. We know this guy is incompetent. I wouldn’t feel safe leaving Pete Hegseth in charge of putting together a DoorDash order.”