Unpacking glaring contradictions in US-Zionist justifications for war against Iran
By David Miller | Press TV | March 5, 2026
While the likes of Trump, Netanyahu, and Rubio peddle inconsistent justifications for the illegal and unprovoked aggression on Iran, CIA intelligence shreds claims of imminent threats, revealing how the Zionist entity dictates US foreign policy.
US President Donald Trump unleashed a barrage of contradictory explanations for the joint US-Zionist assault on the Islamic Republic of Iran, launched on 28 February 2026.
In his initial video statement, Trump asserted the strikes aimed to eliminate “imminent threats” from Iran, including its alleged pursuit of nuclear weapons and long-range missiles capable of reaching the American homeland.
He painted Iran as a “vicious group of very hard, terrible people” whose actions endangered US interests.
This narrative quickly evolved. By 3 March, Trump admitted the decision stemmed from his “opinion” that Iran would attack first if not struck preemptively.
“It was my opinion that they were going to attack first,” he stated, abandoning earlier claims of concrete intelligence.
Such flip-flops, once again, expose exaggeration. Trump claimed Iran neared intercontinental ballistic missiles threatening the US, an assertion contradicted by US intelligence assessments.
The BBC highlighted how Trump’s “imminent threats” lacked support, noting Iran’s nuclear capabilities remained far from weaponisation despite rhetoric.
Trump’s pre-strike doubts further undermine his case. The Associated Press reported Trump’s dissatisfaction with ongoing nuclear talks, leading to the order despite diplomatic avenues. This pivot from diplomacy to aggression reeks of opportunism, not necessity.
Netanyahu’s decades-long push: ‘Regime change’ at any cost
Zionist entity premier Benjamin Netanyahu has long championed aggression against Iran, viewing it as an existential foe. In justifying the 2026 strikes, Netanyahu declared them pre-emptive to thwart Iran’s nuclear and missile programs, threatening overwhelming force.
He warned that allowing Iran nuclear weapons and ICBMs would endanger humanity.
Netanyahu’s rhetoric echoes his four-decade obsession. Even complicit journalists like Mehdi Hasan noted Netanyahu “has been yearning, dreaming of doing this for 40 years,” with Trump as the first US leader to oblige.
The Guardian labelled the assault an “illegal act of aggression” without a lawful basis, driven by Netanyahu’s preference for military solutions over diplomacy.
Post-strike, Netanyahu celebrated the operation’s goals and called (in Farsi) for Iranians to “come to the streets, come out in your millions, to finish the job, to overthrow the ‘regime’ of fear that has made your lives bitter”. Mondoweiss exposed how initial nuclear justifications morphed into overt regime change admissions, mirroring Iraq War tactics.
“When we are finished, take over your government,” President Trump said, addressing the Iranian public in his own video. “It will be yours to take.”
Yet The Nation revealed aims to turn Iran into a failed state, obliterating coherent governance. Netanyahu dusted off the genocidal language used against the Palestinians, saying on Sunday, 1 March, during a visit to a site struck by an Iranian missile.
“We read in this week’s Torah portion, ‘Remember what Amalek did to you.’ We remember—and we act,” he said.
The Amalekites are identified in the Hebrew Bible as a persistent adversary of the Israelites, linked to a Torah commandment to erase their memory. Specifically, 1 Samuel 15:3 mandates the killing of men, women, and infants. This was a clarion call to eliminate all Iranians, showing the utter hypocrisy of calling out on the streets those he wishes dead.
Rubio’s Freudian slip: Admitting Zionist sway over US decisions
Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s comments laid bare the Zionist entity’s influence on US policy. On 2 March, Rubio stated the US struck because “we knew that there was going to be an Israeli action,” prompting preemptive moves to avoid higher US casualties from Iranian retaliation.
Rubio elaborated that awareness of Zionist plans necessitated US involvement, framing it as defensive. Al Jazeera described this as a “looping justification,” highlighting how Zionist intentions drove US timing.
Facing backlash, Rubio walked back his words, insisting the strikes were inevitable regardless of Zionist actions. The New York Times reported his clarification: “The president determined we were not going to get hit first.”
Axios noted Rubio’s remarks ignited MAGA divisions, underscoring Zionist power. The Guardian highlighted Democratic fury over Rubio’s implication of a “war of choice” on behalf of Zionists. PBS detailed Rubio’s defence, warning Iran of further escalation. These revelations confirm that US policy follows Zionist whims.
CIA intelligence shreds the ‘imminent threat’ facade
CIA assessments dismantle claims of Iranian aggression. The Associated Press revealed that US intelligence showed no pre-emptive Iranian strike planned against the US.
Briefings to Congress confirmed no such indicators. Reuters echoed Pentagon admissions: no intelligence on Iran attacking first. The Hill reported similar findings, contradicting Trump’s “imminent threat.”
A House of Commons Library briefing noted in 2025 that US intelligence judged Iran not to be building nuclear weapons. CNN detailed CIA tracking of Iranian leaders, but no offensive plans. Al Jazeera reported CIA talks with Kurds for uprisings, indicating an offensive US posture. Even the Zionist funded propaganda network Iran International quoted ex-CIA Director Petraeus on Iran’s strategic errors, but no pre-strike aggression.
These reports expose fabricated threats to justify unprovoked war.
Pentagon’s panic: Depleted THAAD stocks and radar losses
Pentagon officials express intense paranoia over dwindling air defense stockpiles as a result of Iran’s legitimate self-defense. The Washington Post reported sources describing the mood as “intense and paranoid.” The Daily Beast characterised these Pentagon officials as “secretly panicking” about THAAD interceptor shortages if fighting drags on.
This panic stems from high consumption rates. It takes two or three interceptors per incoming missile, straining limited THAAD stocks.
Some sources claim that for every $1 Iran spends on drones, countries like the UAE (and by implication the US and the Zionist entity) spend approximately $20 to $28. The Washington Post said officials are warning that resources are “stretched thin.”
Compounding this, the US Navy resists escorting ships through the Strait of Hormuz. USNI News reported Navy officials informing shipping leaders of no availability for escorts, despite Trump’s pledges.
Lloyd’s list detailed this U-turn, with the Navy ruling out protection.
These issues link directly to Iran’s destruction of the AN/FPS-132 radar at Al Udeid base. NDTV reported Iranian claims to have obliterated this $1.1 billion system, crucial for ballistic missile tracking. The radar’s loss weakens early warning, compressing reaction times for THAAD systems.
Army Recognition, a defence industry news site, explained that this reduces sensor depth, forcing more interceptor use and accelerating stock depletion. In fact, they describe it in full as this: “early-warning radar uses a fixed UHF phased-array to detect and continuously track ballistic missiles and space objects at very long range, generating early launch warning, trajectory and impact predictions, and cueing data for layered defenses such as THAAD, Patriot, and naval air-and-missile defense systems across the Gulf”.
So, it affects the whole range of layered air defences.
For Navy escorts, diminished radar coverage heightens risks in Hormuz. Radar losses are key to broader defense cracks, making naval operations precarious without full surveillance.
These problems have only been compounded by the latest strikes, which even the New York Times is admitting have damaged or destroyed Radar and other monitoring and targeting equipment in US bases across the region in Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
This chain—radar destruction leading to inefficient defenses and stock drain—fuels Pentagon panic and Navy caution, exposing vulnerabilities in the aggression.
Zionist entity’s grip: How the US became a tool in Iranian aggression
The Zionist colony has long steered US policy toward confrontation with Iran. Al Jazeera probed how Zionist plans precipitated US strikes, with Rubio admitting awareness shaped decisions.
The establishment think tank CFR detailed US intervention following Zionist unilateralism, escalating to full aggression. Mondoweiss argued the war follows an Iraq playbook: false WMD claims shifting to regime change. The Guardian condemned it as illegal, driven by Netanyahu’s impatience with diplomacy.
Euronews quoted Iran’s UN ambassador decrying US betrayal during talks, highlighting Zionist sabotage. Al Mayadeen announced Netanyahu’s declaration of joint aggression. The Nation exposed aims to fragment Iran, with Zionist officials targeting all leadership. WBUR reported Trump’s regime change calls, echoing Zionist goals.
This puppetry endangers global peace, subordinating US interests to messianic Zionist ambitions.
Key contradictions in leadership statements
- Trump’s threat claims vs. intel: Trump warned of missiles soon reaching the US, but even the NYT fact-checks show these are inaccurate.
- Netanyahu’s pre-emption vs. evidence: Netanyahu framed strikes as a gateway to peace, yet Arab News notes endless war denial.
- Rubio’s Zionist trigger vs. walkback: Rubio suggested Israeli plans forced the US hand, later denied.
- Intel on no strike vs. official narratives: AP sources confirm no preemptive Iranian plans.
These inconsistencies fuel scepticism in the American security apparatus as well as – increasingly – with the US allied states in West Asia.
These deceptions are being unmasked in real time. The unthinkable is now dawning on the US and its allies; this may be the moment that the US is pushed out of West Asia once and for all.
Solidarity with Iran at this time demands truth over propaganda and the final push to remove US influence and finally collapse the Zionist colonisation project in Palestine.
David Miller is the producer and co-host of Press TV’s weekly Palestine Declassified show. He was sacked from Bristol University in October 2021 over his Palestine advocacy.
Iraq and Cuba hit by blackouts amid US pressure and attacks on Iran
RT | March 5, 2026
Both Iraq and Cuba have been plunged into nationwide blackouts, with the Middle Eastern country’s grid collapsing after a sudden drop in gas supplies to a major power plant in Basra, while the Caribbean island’s outage is being blamed on chronic fuel shortages worsened by the US blockade on Venezuelan oil.
The day before the Iraqi blackout, an Electricity Ministry spokesperson was quoted as saying that “incomplete supplies” of gas from neighboring Iran were already affecting power plant operations. Iran has been facing a massive US-Israeli air campaign since Saturday.
A separate power facility also experienced a shutdown in central Salah al-Din province, with local police explicitly denying reports that the station was targeted by an attack, according to the state-run INA news agency.
Iraq relies on Iranian gas for 30-40% of its power generation. The dependence is a direct consequence of decades of foreign intervention in the country. Before the 1991 Gulf War, the grid, though strained by sanctions, largely met demand. The war destroyed 75% of its generating capacity, and the 2003 US-led invasion caused a catastrophic collapse to less than 10% of prior output.
Blackouts also hit Cuba on Wednesday, with a widespread power outage plunging approximately two-thirds of the island into darkness, including the capital Havana.
The blackout was caused by a shutdown at one of the island’s largest thermoelectric power plants, according to the Cuban Ministry of Energy and Mines.
The island nation’s chronic fuel shortages have been severely exacerbated by a US blockade on oil from Venezuela. Since US forces abducted Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in January, Washington has seized multiple tankers bound for Cuba.
The Cuban government has long attributed its economic crisis to decades of US sanctions, which it says contribute directly to the lack of investment in power generation and its crumbling electric grid.
Against this backdrop, US President Donald Trump suggested last week that the US could carry out a “friendly takeover of Cuba,” claiming the island nation’s government is on the brink of collapse and is actively negotiating with Washington.
US-Israeli Efforts to Degrade Iran’s Missile Might Failed – Military Researcher
Sputnik – 05.03.2026
The intensity of Iranian missile attacks against the US and Israeli assets in the Middle East does not seem to abate, despite the United States’ claims to the contrary, Konstantin Sivkov, a member of the Russian Academy of Rocket and Artillery Sciences, tells Sputnik.
Despite losing a number of its missile launchers, as is expected during war, Iran has been successfully destroying US radar systems, satellite communication stations and data processing facilities in the region.
“Iran is striking at the target designation system – the brains, the decision making system, the early warning system,” Sivkov remarks.
Iranian missile launchers, he explains, are either deployed under extensive air defense protection or hidden in underground shelters, which they leave briefly to unleash their deadly payload upon the enemy.
The US military thus has a very brief window to track down and attack these launchers while they are in the open.
The active use of decoys by Iran also makes destroying these missile launchers problematic for the US.
Back during the Desert Storm op in 1991, some 70% of the initial US missile salvos launched at Iraq ended up striking decoys, and during the NATO air raids on former Yugoslavia, the number of munitions expended on decoys was even greater, Sivkov points out.
Meanwhile, Iran has the capability to produce new mobile missile launchers to replace the destroyed ones.
The United States’ reluctance to send more aircraft into Iranian airspace further suggests that the US’ claims that Iran’s air defense capabilities have been neutralized are also premature, he suggests, pointing out that the US seems to rely more on long-range missile strikes.
The US’ attempt to sic Kurdish factions on Iran is tantamount to admission that their airstrike campaign did not produce the desired result, Sivkov adds: the initial plan, to cause chaos by murdering the Iranian leadership and to install a puppet regime in the country, clearly failed.
New American copium: Ghost of Kuwait
By Drago Bosnic | March 5, 2026
As the unprovoked US aggression on Iran isn’t going as planned (mildly speaking), the mainstream propaganda machine desperately keeps trying to cope with the incompetence of the American military, particularly the failures of the USAF, which is often presented as “invincible”. This is especially true when it comes to the humiliating loss of three F-15E multirole strike fighters. The mainstream propaganda machine first reported that they “crashed due to a malfunction“, then that it was a “Patriot” SAM (surface-to-air missile) system and now it’s supposedly a Kuwaiti F/A-18 fighter jet. The only excuse that hasn’t been used yet is a bird strike (although such propaganda is not unheard of).
Namely, the Wall Street Journal claims that “a catastrophic ‘friendly fire’ incident” involving the Kuwaiti jet fighter resulted in “an accidental shootdown” of three American F-15s. To quote “anonymous US officials and those familiar with initial reports”, a Kuwaiti F/A-18 pilot launched three missiles at the American aircraft, resulting in the loss of all three jets. The incident was supposedly triggered by “an environment of extreme tension” and “a breakdown in battlefield identification”. The report says that shortly before the shootdown, an Iranian drone successfully penetrated Kuwaiti air defenses and struck “a tactical operations center at a commercial port, killing six US troops”.
In the immediate aftermath, Kuwaiti military forces were “on high alert and on edge”, so when their radar systems detected the three American F-15s entering the sector, “the operators, fearing a follow-up Iranian attack, engaged the targets”. And yet, the mainstream propaganda machine still fails to explain how exactly this “catastrophic friendly fire incident” unfolded. A spokesperson for US Central Command (CENTCOM) also declined to provide a detailed account, noting that the incident is currently under investigation. So far, it’s only been confirmed that the Kuwaiti F/A-18 is the primary focus, although officials still haven’t ruled out ground-based air defenses as potential culprits.
“It’s a busy, busy air environment, and in times of stress, tension, crisis, and, certainly in this case, conflict, even more so,” Mark Gunzinger, a retired USAF colonel who flew B-52 strategic bombers, said, adding: “It’s all the more complicated when you have different air defense systems operating on different frequencies that aren’t integrated, and some of those systems are actively trying to counter threats such as drones.”
Interestingly, the WSJ report acknowledges that “the official cause of the crash remains subject to change as investigators piece together the sequence of events”. In other words, the Pentagon is yet to think of the best propaganda narrative to avoid admitting that Russian-made Iranian SAM systems destroyed the three “invincible” American F-15s in mere minutes. Worse yet (for the US), it’s highly likely these air defenses were operated by Russian crews, which adds yet another layer of humiliation. Still, the copium continues, as these “unnamed military officials” point to “this tragedy as a stark illustration of the challenges inherent in modern, multinational air wars”.
They insist that “the airspace is currently a historically murky combination of manned aircraft, cruise missiles and drones” and that “American pilots have been flying continuous sorties alongside an array of 19 different types of aircraft — including tankers, reconnaissance planes, and bombers — all moving at different speeds and altitudes”. While it’s true that there’s aerial congestion and that it’s exacerbated by long-range missile exchanges (the US military is launching cruise missiles and other standoff munitions, while Iran responds with waves of ballistic missiles and kamikaze drones), it still doesn’t justify all the pretexts about “friendly fire”. On the contrary, it makes all this even more embarrassing.
Retired Lieutenant General Dan Karbler, who formerly led the Army’s Space and Missile Defense Command, said that “today’s airspace is significantly more complex than during the Iraq wars of the 1990s and 2000s”, insisting that “fratricide incidents typically result from multiple failures in communication or equipment”. The report says that “investigators are now scrutinizing whether the F-15s’ Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) transponders were functioning, whether the Kuwaitis were briefed on the American flight paths and whether electronic jamming interfered with voice communications”. However, while all this could’ve certainly malfunctioned on one jet, the chances of it happening to all three simultaneously are virtually zero.
It’s expected to see the Pentagon so desperate to wiggle its way out of the PR hit caused by such a defeat. However, it should be noted that the entire narrative about the F-15’s alleged “invincibility” was based on unadulterated lies and attempts to suppress all reports about combat losses. Namely, there’s a 2018 video of a Saudi F-15SA hit by a Houthi R-27T modified into a SAM. Several more aircraft were hit, with at least one more F-15SA destroyed. There were reports that multiple aircraft were scrapped due to severe damage, although the mainstream propaganda machine keeps hiding facts to maintain the F-15’s “invincible streak” narrative alive for as long as possible.
However, the F-15’s performance in previous conflicts makes this virtually impossible. Namely, during the Samurra Air Battle on January 30, 1991, two Iraqi Air Force Russian-made MiG-25PDS shot down two F-15Cs without losses. The Americans never admitted these losses, but they made sure that no wreckage was ever found. Almost a decade before that, a Syrian MiG-21 shot down an Israeli F-15, with the US and Israel once again doing their best to conceal the loss. However, it was recorded by Syrian and Russian sources. The financial aspect of the latest losses is also not negligible. Namely, an older F-15E cost over $30 million in the late 1990s, while the newest F-15EX variants have a price tag of nearly $100 million each.
Worse yet, old F-15Es cannot be replaced, because their production ended in 2001. Thus, the damage caused by this defeat goes far beyond just three airframes. Another question is, will the mainstream propaganda machine now publish “breaking news” about the “Ghost of Kuwait”? It would certainly make more sense than what they tried doing in NATO-occupied Ukraine with the mythical “Ghost of Kiev”. In the meantime, we already see that the Trump administration is engaging in full-blown copium, going from claims that it would defeat Iran in 24 hours to days and weeks. Soon, it could be months, while heavy losses and damage to US occupation forces in the Middle East keep piling up.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
IRGC strikes critical Israeli military sites with Khorramshahr-4 missiles in latest wave
Press TV – March 5, 2026
The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) announced early Wednesday that its aerospace force targeted the critical Israeli military infrastructure with heavy Khorramshahr-4 ballistic missiles in the 19th wave of True Promise 4 Operation.
In a statement, the IRGC said the super-heavy missiles, each fitted with a one-ton class warhead, were launched in the pre-dawn hours.
The targets of the strike were central Tel Aviv, Ben-Gurion Airport and Squadron 27 of the Israeli Air Force at the airport, according to the statement.
It said the strategic salvo was preceded by attack drones and that the strike package penetrated “seven layers” of regional and domestic air defenses to reach its objectives.
Khorramshahr-4 is one of Iran’s most advanced weapons, a roughly 13-metre missile with a boost weight of nearly 30 tonnes and a maneuverable re-entry warhead (MaRV) capable of carrying over 1,000 kilograms of explosive payload.
The IRGC statement also said that in the previous wave its forces had successfully struck some 20 US military targets across Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait.
The statement described the strikes as part of coordinated, multi-axis action by Iran’s armed forces that exceeded US and Israeli expectations and had altered the operational calculus of the ongoing war imposed on the Islamic Republic.
In the statement, the IRGC further said American troops were fleeing regional bases and seeking shelter in hotels in host countries, while decrying the US military for using civilian facilities in Persian Gulf states as cover for military activity.
The statement also warned that such movements are under constant intelligence surveillance and that Iranian forces remain prepared to target aggressor troops.
The IRGC says at least 560 American troops have been killed in retaliatory operations and many more injured since Saturday.
US racks up billions in losses during first four days of war as Iran pummels key Pentagon assets: Report
The Cradle | March 4, 2026
Iran’s retaliatory strikes on US assets in the Persian Gulf have caused at least $2 billion in losses for Washington since the start of the war against the Islamic Republic, Anadolu Agency reported on 4 March.
Almost fifty percent of the losses result from Iran’s destruction of a US AN/FPS-132 early warning radar system at Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar, which is worth $1.1 billion.
The Islamic Republic also took responsibility for shooting down three F-15E Strike Eagles over Kuwait on Sunday, an incident US Central Command (CENTCOM) claims was caused by “friendly fire” from Kuwaiti forces. The estimated cost to replace the jets is $282 million.
Attacks by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Forces (IRGC) also caused heavy damage to the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet headquarters in Manama, Bahrain, destroying two satellite communications terminals and several large buildings.
“Using open-source intelligence reports, the targeted SATCOM terminals were identified as AN/GSC-52Bs, which approximately cost $20 million, factoring in deployment and installation costs,” Anadolu Agency reports.
Tehran has also reported destroying the AN/TPY-2 radar component of Washington’s Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) air-defense system deployed at Al-Ruwais Industrial City in the UAE, estimated to be worth $500 million.
“Combining these costs, Iran has damaged $1.902 billion worth of US military assets in the region,” the Turkish news agency says.
On top of these losses, Washington spent at least $2.3 billion during the first four days of the war, which was launched without congressional approval by using post-9/11 emergency laws.
The first 24 hours of the so-called “Operation Epic Fury” alone cost around $779 million, including pre-strike mobilization expenses of $630 million.
“At the current scale of operations, a three-week war could easily exceed tens of billions of dollars in expenses,” the Center for American Progress (CAP) estimated on Tuesday.
The US public policy research and advocacy organization also emphasized that “a conservative estimate for the initial costs of Operation Epic Fury is more than $5 billion as of March 2—and the campaign is just getting started.”
More losses still need to be accounted for, as the IRGC and its regional allies have targeted at least seven US military sites across West Asia since the start of the war, destroying several US diplomatic missions and intelligence sites belonging to the CIA and Mossad.
US and Israeli Claims of Depleted Iranian Arsenals are Just Military Propaganda – Expert
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 05.03.2026
American officials claim Iran’s arsenal is dwindling and launchers are running low — but there’s no objective proof, veteran Russian military observer Yury Lyamin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, tells Sputnik.
“Such statements should be treated with great skepticism and seen as standard military propaganda,” Yury Lyamin says. “I believe Iran’s total number of launchers is generally underestimated.”
Yes, the number of missile launches has dropped – but why?
- the decline in launches is largely due to constant air pressure, forcing Iranian forces to take maximum precautions
- US and Israeli strikes on tunnel entrances at missile bases require time to clear debris and carry out safety checks
“Iran’s main missile stockpiles and launcher reserves are stored deep within underground missile bases carved into mountains, making them extremely difficult to hit. Moreover, it’s unclear how they are moved inside,” the pundit explains.
Lyamin draws attention to the fact that Iran keeps its missile launchers as simple and inexpensive as possible – they’re typically mounted on standard trailers and trucks. That allows the Islamic Republic to maintain a substantial storage of those devices.
US vs. Israel: Conflicting Assessments Stir Controversy
The Israeli side claim that “more than half” of all Iranian missile launchers have been destroyed, whereas the US insists Iran is “running out” of them.
Israeli figures are also questionable, according to the expert:
- Israel claimed 300 launchers destroyed two days ago, but videos from the US and Israel show roughly a tenth of that
- While it’s true not everything is captured on video, the huge discrepancy warrants skepticism
Even within the video evidence provided by Israel and the US, there are questionable cases, according to the expert:
- Some strikes appear to have hit ordinary trucks mistaken for launchers
- One video even shows a strike on a broken truck with its hood open
- In another, a launcher that had already been destroyed was hit repeatedly
Iran denies attacking Azerbaijan, suggests Mossad involvement
Al Mayadeen | March 5, 2026
Iran’s armed forces denied on Thursday that they launched drones toward Azerbaijan after Baku accused Tehran of carrying out UAV attacks in the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic.
The statement was issued by the General Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces and carried by the Iranian state broadcaster IRIB.
Azerbaijan reports drone attack
Earlier in the day, Azerbaijan’s Foreign Ministry claimed drones launched from Iranian territory struck targets in the Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, leaving two people injured.
Tehran rejected the claim and emphasized that Iran respects the sovereignty of neighboring countries, particularly regional Muslim states.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran, respecting the sovereignty of all neighboring states, especially brotherly Muslim countries, denies the launch of UAVs by the Iranian Armed Forces toward Azerbaijan,” the General Staff said in the statement.
Tehran blames Israeli involvement
The Iranian military suggested that “Israel” may have launched a drone toward Azerbaijani territory in an attempt to blame Iran and escalate tensions between the neighboring countries.
The accusation comes as regional tensions have intensified following the US and Israeli attacks on Iran and Tehran’s retaliatory operations.
Claims of covert Israeli activity in the region
The allegations also emerge amid claims of covert Israeli operations in several Gulf countries.
Speaking on The Tucker Carlson Show, American journalist Tucker Carlson said authorities in Qatar and Saudi Arabia had arrested Mossad agents accused of planning bombings in those countries. Carlson described the development as unusual and questioned the logic behind such operations.
He suggested the alleged plots could be part of broader efforts to destabilize multiple countries in the region while escalating pressure on Iran.
Iranian Armed Forces say no missile fired from Iran into Turkey
Press TV – March 5, 2026
Iran’s Armed Forces say they did not fire any missiles into Turkey, stressing Tehran’s respect for the neighboring country’s territorial integrity.
“The Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran dismiss firing any missile into Turkey,” the Chief Staff of the Armed Forces said in a statement on Thursday.
It added that the Iranian Armed Forces respect the sovereignty of the neighboring and friendly country of Turkey.
The statement came after Turkey’s Ministry of National Defense claimed that NATO air defense systems had destroyed a ballistic missile fired from Iran and heading into Turkish airspace.
The ministry announced on Wednesday that the missile was shot down after passing over Syria and Iraq. The target of the missile has not been determined.
Incirlik Air Base, located in Turkey, is under the control of the country’s air force and operates as a joint Turkish-US airbase.
It is used by foreign military forces, mainly the US and other NATO allies.
Incirlik was a key logistics and air support site for US-led operations in Iraq during the 1991 Persian Gulf War and later as a cargo hub for Iraq and Afghanistan operations.
Iran is defending itself against an uprovoked US-Israeli aggression that started last Saturday. Iranian armed forces have launched multiple drone and missile operations against US military assets across the region since the start of the war.
The myth of military ‘decapitation’
By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 5, 2026
The recent escalation in the Middle East has brought back to the center of strategic debate a recurring concept in Western military doctrine: the so-called “decapitation strike.” The idea is simple in appearance and politically seductive – eliminate the leadership of an adversary state in order to trigger institutional collapse, military disorganization, and ultimately regime change. However, historical reality shows that such an approach is far from the magic solution its proponents often imagine.
The bombings carried out by the United States and Israel against Iran, culminating in the death of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, were clearly conceived under this logic. The expectation seemed to be that by removing the main political and religious authority of the Islamic Republic, the system would either collapse outright or face sufficient internal unrest to enable a forced transition. At the same time, it was assumed that Iran’s response would remain limited, as in previous confrontations.
That calculation proved mistaken. Instead of disintegration, there was internal consolidation. Thousands of Iranians took to the streets across the country, even under bombardment, to support the Islamic Republic and chant “death to America.” Moreover, there was no strategic paralysis among Iranian decision-makers, who promptly responded by striking targets throughout the Middle East.
This gap between expectation and reality stems from a structural characteristic of contemporary Western military thinking. Washington, accustomed to rapid interventions against fragile states, has consolidated a culture of short-duration warfare, marked by overwhelming initial destructive power followed by swift disengagement. Tel Aviv, due to its territorial dimensions and demographic limitations, developed a doctrine based on preventive strikes and the rapid neutralization of enemy leadership. However, this model tends to fail when applied against states with national cohesion, solid institutional frameworks, and mobilization capacity.
Iran is not a collapsed state, nor a fragmented tribal structure. With more than 90 million inhabitants and a political order consolidated since 1979, the country built mechanisms of succession and redundancy within its command structure. Khamenei’s advanced age had already made the question of transition an internal matter. Thus, the “decapitation” attempt did not strike at the functional core of Iranian power. On the contrary, it strengthened patriotic sentiment and expanded popular support for the government.
The strategic lesson is clear: complex political systems do not depend exclusively on a single individual. When institutions are deeply rooted and chains of command are distributed, eliminating a symbolic figure may generate martyrdom and cohesion rather than collapse.
This understanding helps explain why Russia did not adopt, in its conflict with Ukraine, a systematic policy of targeted assassinations against the political leadership in Kiev. Since the beginning of the special military operation, Moscow has demonstrated technical capacity to strike command centers and critical infrastructure. Even so, it has not prioritized the physical elimination of President Vladimirr Zelensky or other central figures of the Ukrainian government.
This choice does not stem from incapacity, but from strategic calculation. First, Zelensky’s removal could have produced the opposite of the intended effect, transforming him into an international symbol and further consolidating Western support for Kyiv. Second, the Ukrainian state structure – sustained by intense NATO assistance – does not depend exclusively on one individual leader. A replacement could occur rapidly without fundamentally altering the conflict’s dynamics.
Furthermore, Russian strategy has been characterized by a prolonged war of attrition focused on the gradual degradation of the adversary’s military and logistical capacity. This model stands in direct contrast to the logic of decapitation. Moscow appears to understand that in conflicts between organized states, victory is rarely achieved through a single spectacular blow, but rather through the systematic erosion of the enemy’s material conditions.
The myth of decapitation persists because it offers a simplified and politically marketable narrative: remove the “head,” and the body will fall. Yet recent experience demonstrates that this assumption ignores the resilient nature of modern states. Leaders can be replaced; institutions, when consolidated, tend to endure.
Ultimately, the obsession with decapitation strikes reveals more about the strategic limitations of those who execute them than about the vulnerability of those who suffer them. Recent history suggests that wars between powers or structured states are not decided by dramatic gestures, but by prolonged processes in which internal cohesion and industrial capacity weigh more heavily than the elimination of individual figures.
Zelensky issues military threat to Orban
RT | March 5, 2026
Ukraine’s Vladimir Zelensky has issued an apparent military threat to Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban over his blocking of EU aid for Kiev.
Orban last month vetoed Brussels’ planned €90 billion ($106 billion) emergency loan for Kiev in response to Ukraine preventing Russian oil supplies to Hungary via the Druzhba pipeline.
Speaking at a press conference in Kiev on Thursday, Zelensky stated: “We hope that one person in the EU will not block the €90 billion… Otherwise, we will give the address of this person to our armed forces, to our guys, so that they call him and communicate with him in their own language.”
The diplomatic dispute between Hungary and Ukraine has escalated in recent weeks, spilling over into personal barbs. Zelensky launched a string of attacks against Orban, including fat-shaming him during the Munich Security Conference last month.
The Hungarian prime minister has long opposed Ukraine’s push to join the EU, and has repeatedly refused to send it weapons or approve EU military aid, calling for diplomacy instead.
Orban, meanwhile, has taken to social media to issue his own warning.
“There will be no deals, no compromise. We will break the Ukrainian oil blockade by force,” he wrote on X on Thursday, adding that oil will soon flow to Hungary again through the Druzhba pipeline.
The Soviet-era pipeline, part of which runs through Ukraine, went offline in January after Kiev claimed it had been damaged by Russian strikes – accusations Moscow denies. Hungary and Slovakia, both heavily reliant on Russian energy, have accused Kiev of deliberately cutting them off for political reasons and inventing obstacles for restarting oil flows.
