Iran no longer has any reason for restraint
By Samuel Geddes | Al Mayadeen | March 3, 2026
Tehran may well refuse US-Israeli pleas for a ceasefire until the region is transformed.
Both Trump and Netanyahu find themselves in an extraordinarily vulnerable position. They have given their greatest ideological opponent the means and the justification to extract maximum damage from them, as well as ceasefire conditions that would truly make this conflict a turning point in modern history.
President Trump clearly believed, at Netanyahu’s encouragement, that assassinating Iran’s Leader would pressure it to soften its negotiating position on the nuclear file. What he did instead was to shatter nearly a decade of Iranian restraint in the face of relentless provocation.
Trump has rendered both Washington and Tel Aviv more desperate for an end to the war than Iran. In addition to retribution for the assassination of the Leader of the Revolution, Tehran is calling in the debts of Trump’s “maximum pressure strategy” in full.
Ever since Trump’s withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018, Tehran has attempted to limit the rate of escalation, especially following the assassination of Quds Force commander Gen. Qassem Soleimani in 2020 and others across various arenas since October 2023’s Al-Aqsa Flood.
Netanyahu’s domestic political interests have been the opposite, deliberately prolonging the genocidal onslaught in Gaza, expanding it to the West Bank, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Iraq, and from 2024, Iran, when it bombed the Damascus consulate. He followed up by assassinating Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran and much of Lebanese Hezbollah’s leadership.
By June last year, he had attained his life-long goal of drawing Washington directly into hostilities with Iran when it bombed the Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan nuclear facilities. Now he has obliterated the ultimate red line with the airstrike that martyred Ayatollah Sayed Ali Khamenei.
As US and Israeli military sources themselves acknowledged, even before the outbreak of war, stockpiles of missile defense munitions were critically low. The 12 days of direct war between Iran and “Israel” last year cut deeply into the regime’s Iron Dome, Arrow and David’s Sling systems before Washington stepped in to impose a ceasefire.
Now that Iran and Hezbollah are unleashing their arsenal, the ability of Israel, US forces and GCC states to avoid catastrophic blows is being measured in days rather than weeks. The global supply of these munitions has been further strained by shipments sent to Ukraine and will be insufficient to resupply the West Asian theatre well before the end of this week. This will critically expose western assets not just in the region but globally, for years to come.
As of just the third day of the war, maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz is effectively at a standstill. In Saudi Arabia, Ras Tanura, the most crucial oil refinery in the world, has sustained impact from drones and halted operations.
Even without direct hits on regional energy infrastructure, GCC oil producers will be forced to halt production within three weeks due to a lack of storage capacity. President Trump’s favorite metric of economic performance, the stock market, is staring down the barrel of an energy shock unseen since 1973, and which may well exceed that crisis. The frail state of the US economy, combined with the global blowback to its tariff policy, could easily tip into recession or even depression. This would be shattering to the petrodollar system as well as the very status of the US Dollar as the global reserve currency.
Once Iranian missiles are unimpededly striking vital military and economic targets in “Israel” daily and inflicting mass casualties on US forces from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Arabian Sea, the Islamic Republic will be able to impose extraordinary conditions merely in exchange for a halt to the war. It will plausibly be able to demand the unconditional lifting of all Western sanctions, not just against itself, but against Yemen, Lebanon, and Gaza. It will also be able to dictate the end of Netanyahu’s regional escalation spree, forcing “Israel’s” withdrawal from Gaza, Lebanese and Syrian territories, and re-establishing a balance of terror that ensures an indefinite calm, even if a limited one.
Alternatively, it could, in emulation of Ansar Allah in early 2025, agree a separate ceasefire with Washington, leaving them a free hand to continue full-scale bombardment of “Israel”.
Assuming the intensity of hostilities doesn’t achieve this first, it could also demand the definitive withdrawal of US forces from the Persian Gulf, ending America’s hegemony over the region and the world by extension.
US ‘stonewalls’ Gulf calls for more interceptors as supplies quickly run out: Report
The Cradle | March 3, 2026
Washington has been “stonewalling” its Gulf allies’ requests for a replenishment of air defense missiles, Middle East Eye (MEE) reported, coinciding with intensifying Iranian attacks on US bases and assets across the region.
“At least one Gulf state that has come under attack from Iran asked US officials about replenishing supplies that have been depleted since the joint US-Israeli attack on Iran, but was brushed off,” a former US official familiar with the matter told MEE.
The former official said a separate Gulf state “responded to US requests to use air bases in their country with enquiries about the US’s commitment to their air defense systems,” and added that Washington’s Arab allies will “be left wanting if they expect new supplies of interceptors.”
“Whatever munitions were produced in the last couple of months, we have shot several years’ worth of production in the last few days,” the source went on to say.
The report also says pressure is growing on Arab states to join Israel and the US in their war against Iran.
Kelly Grieco at the Stimson Center think tank said, “The UAE has now burned through a significant chunk of an interceptor stockpile that took years to build.”
“US defenses focus on Israel … There is a sense of disappointment in the Gulf with our ally and partner, if we are describing that correctly, which focuses on Israel security and stability of Israel without attention to defending the Gulf states which are being subjected to Iranian attacks,” Saudi political analyst Suleiman al-Aqili told Al Jazeera.
Iranian missile and drone attacks against Israel, US military bases across the region, and major energy assets in the Gulf and Iraqi Kurdistan have not stopped since the start of the US-Israeli war. The Strait of Hormuz has also been closed.
The US Navy’s Fifth Fleet base, in particular, is among the targets being relentlessly pounded. Six US soldiers have been killed over the past few days [as per US sources].
Iraqi resistance factions allied to Tehran have also joined the fight, along with Lebanon’s Hezbollah.
Despite the mass buildup of US defenses and Israel’s sophisticated network of interceptor systems, Iranian missiles continue to make direct hits on Israeli targets.
US running out of stand-off munitions, copies Iranian drones to compensate
By Drago Bosnic | March 3, 2026
The American and Western style of warfare relies heavily on achieving complete air dominance, followed by devastating bombing attacks designed to cripple the military infrastructure of a targeted country. If that doesn’t work, the US/NATO then resorts to unadulterated terrorism, targeting noncombatants and civilian infrastructure. During the early stages of the (First) Cold War, this approach was used against Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and numerous other countries. However, it never resulted in a strategic victory. On the contrary, it only galvanized the resistance of the local populace, strengthening their resolve in the face of American/Western terror bombing strategy.
This military doctrine suffered a failure over Indochina, where the heroic resistance of the Vietnamese people resulted in a crushing and humiliating defeat for the invading Americans. With the help of Russia, which sent thousands of military advisors and the most advanced air defense systems of the time, the Vietnamese military managed to shoot down approximately 12,000 US aircraft, saving millions of lives in the process. Just like in Korea, Washington DC employed an indiscriminate terror bombing of Vietnamese cities. The estimates for the total number of casualties go upwards of 5 million for Indochina, as American occupation forces heavily bombed the entire region.
This is particularly true for Laos, which suffered devastation on 98% of its territory. From 1964 to 1973, the USAF launched nearly 600,000 sorties, dropping well over 2,000,000 tons of ordnance on the unfortunate country. This equates to one aircraft load every eight minutes, 24/7 for 9 years, making Laos the most heavily bombed country in history. Laos formally wasn’t even a party to the US-orchestrated conflict, but the Pentagon still dropped more bombs on it than on Germany and Japan during WWII, combined! With a population of only 3 million at the time, this equated to roughly one ton of bombs per person. This terror campaign left more than 80 million unexploded cluster munitions and other ordnance.
Needless to say, these American weapons kill civilians to this very day, well over half a century later. In addition, much of the land remains unusable, contributing to poverty in affected regions. The only reason the situation wasn’t as bad for Vietnam is that it had Russian-made SAM (surface-to-air missile) systems and fought back with unrelenting resolve. The US aggression on Indochina resulted in a change of tactics and doctrine, with the Pentagon placing all of its bets on precision warfare in subsequent conflicts. By the end of the (First) Cold War and afterwards, the US launched dozens of truly unprovoked wars of aggression, using this to great strategic effect.
However, even after adopting the new strategy, civilian casualties kept piling up. Tens of thousands were killed in US aggression on Serbia/Yugoslavia in the 1990s, culminating with the 1999 bombing. One would expect fewer civilian casualties as military technologies became more advanced, but this actually got worse in the Middle East, where US wars of aggression killed at least five million people from 2001 to 2021. The latest American war is no less bloody, with the USAF killing up to 200 Iranian schoolgirls on the first day of aggression on Iran. However, this resulted in yet another “Vietnam effect”, with the Iranian people demonstrating resolve to fight back and defend their country.
The USAF lost at least three “invincible” F-15 jets, while the Iranian military continues pounding American bases all across the Middle East. The Pentagon is already worried that it will soon run out of costly stand-off munitions, which were designed for “shock & awe” wars that would knock out a country in days or weeks. However, it’s perfectly clear now that’s not going to happen, so Washington DC is looking for alternatives to maintain a prolonged war. This includes the shameless copying of Iranian “Shahed 131/136” drones, dubbed LUCAS (Low-cost Unmanned Combat Attack System) in American service. These will be used to replace the exorbitantly expensive “Tomahawk” cruise missiles and similar weapons.
Much unlike the US, Russia and Iran jointly upgraded the latter’s “Shahed” designs, with Moscow providing significantly enhanced guidance systems, electronic warfare (EW) countermeasures, larger warheads, etc. The Kremlin is now also using this experience to improve its own long-range precision-strike capabilities, including with new cruise missiles that are more affordable than current munitions. Iran is also likely to receive such technologies from Russia, aiding its resistance efforts against US aggression. The stakes are high, especially for Donald Trump, whose political “skin” is in the game, particularly in a midterm election year.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
War on Iran shifts to attrition phase: Bloomberg
Al Mayadeen | March 3, 2026
An analysis published by Bloomberg on Tuesday suggests that only days after open hostilities began, the confrontation between the United States and Iran has shifted into a prolonged war on attrition.
According to the report, waves of Iranian drones, particularly the Shahed-136, have continued targeting US military installations and infrastructure across the Gulf following the initial strikes launched by Washington and Tel Aviv. While Gulf officials claim interception rates exceeding 90% through US-supplied Patriot missile batteries, the economic imbalance of the battlefield tells a different story. Each PAC-3 interceptor costs millions of dollars, dramatically outweighing the comparatively modest cost of the drones they attempt to neutralize.
The disparity recalls lessons from previous conflicts, including the 12-day aggression on Iran in June 2025, where sustained barrages exposed the limits of even advanced air defense architectures. High-end Western interceptor systems can be placed under strain when deployed continuously against lower-cost aerial platforms. Analysts say this dynamic creates mounting financial and logistical pressure on US regional partners, raising persistent questions about the long-term sustainability of such defensive operations.
A strategic response to escalation
Observers cited in the report argue that Iran’s approach reflects deliberate operational planning rather than improvised escalation. By relying heavily on drones and calibrated missile deployments, Tehran appears to be managing its resources while imposing steady costs on foreign forces operating near its borders.
Kelly Grieco of the Stimson Center noted that an attritional approach “makes operational sense from Iran’s perspective,” suggesting Tehran is calculating that defensive stocks among US allies could be depleted while political pressure mounts across Gulf capitals.
Iran is believed to retain substantial reserves of ballistic missiles and loitering munitions. Reports indicate more than 1,200 projectiles have been launched since hostilities began, though heavier systems may be preserved for prolonged engagement. Analysts view this as evidence that Tehran is pacing its response rather than exhausting its capabilities prematurely.
Logistical Questions on Both Sides
Bloomberg also noted that Patriot interceptor supplies in some Gulf states, including Qatar, could last only days at the current rate of usage, prompting behind-the-scenes diplomatic engagement to prevent further escalation. Production of PAC-3 interceptors remains limited, while the more advanced THAAD systems operated by Saudi Arabia and the UAE are generally reserved for high-speed ballistic threats and involve even greater financial cost.
These concerns echo remarks made separately to CNN by Shashank Joshi, defense editor at The Economist, who warned that high-intensity exchanges could quickly expose vulnerabilities in advanced interceptor stockpiles.
“But my supposition is that, after about sort of another week of this, we would begin to see very, very serious shortages, particularly of the most high-end interceptor munitions,” Joshi said.
Joshi further indicated that a sustained campaign would likely extend beyond intercepting incoming projectiles to targeting missile production networks and supply chains inside Iran, an approach designed to degrade long-term replenishment capacity rather than merely blunt immediate attacks.
US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth sought to limit expectations about an extended campaign, stating: “This is not Iraq, this is not endless.”
Meanwhile, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi suggested that military units were operating under standing strategic directives. “Our military units are now in fact independent and somehow isolated and they are acting based on instructions, general instructions given to them in advance,” he told reporters.
If exchanges continue at the current intensity, both offensive and defensive arsenals could begin thinning within weeks.
Attrition Advantage: Why Iran Holds Upper Hand
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 03.03.2026
The US cannot sustain a full-scale war of attrition in the Persian Gulf at the current pace of munition deliveries, veteran Russian combat pilot Maj. Gen. Vladimir Popov tells Sputnik.
“The Americans are operating ‘off the truck,’ [and are heavily dependent] ‘on resupply,'” veteran Russian combat pilot Maj. Gen. Vladimir Popov tells Sputnik. “This involves massive logistics—lengthy and time-consuming processes. And it’s far from easy to sustain that across an ocean from the American continent.”
The existing stockpiles in warehouses and arsenals of air and naval US bases across the region, including Israel, contain a limited number of shells, bombs and drones, according to the pundit.
- “Without regular resupply from the US mainland—from the main weapons storage bases—their current stockpile would last roughly two weeks, no more than that”
- Rotating troops could turn into a major headache for the Americans
- Next comes the logistics of maintenance and rear-line support for supplying weapons to the region—extremely costly processes
“I think the advantage will clearly be on Iran’s side,” Popov says. “The calculations might suggest the Americans are in a far worse position than Iran. It’s also worth noting that the Israelis sparked this conflict—and their arsenal is similarly limited and unlikely to last long.”
Moscow warns of worrying NATO buildup in Arctic
RT | March 2, 2026
NATO is attempting to curb Russia’s freedom of navigation in the Arctic, Moscow’s ambassador to Norway, Nikolay Korchunov, has said.
In an interview with Izvestia on Monday, Korchunov argued that Norway was seeking to squeeze Moscow out of the Spitsbergen archipelago, where Russia – the only country besides Norway to have carried out economic activity there for decades – has no intention of scaling back its operations.
A Norwegian territory, Spitsbergen has a Russian presence in the form of the Arktikugol mining company and the mining community of Barentsburg. Russia enjoys an equal right to engage in commercial activities on the archipelago alongside 13 other nations in accordance with the 1920 Svalbard Treaty, which also made the territory a demilitarized free-trade zone while recognizing Norway’s sovereignty over it.
Korchunov said Oslo was deliberately hindering Arktikugol operations and curbing movement and economic activity in parts of the archipelago, while pointing to a NATO-driven military buildup marked by more frequent visits from Norwegian aircraft and warships. He warned that bloc members “possess significant naval capabilities” and had shown a readiness to use them to curb freedom of navigation in breach of international law.
According to the diplomat, NATO is mulling a partial or full naval blockade of Russia, as the military bloc has boosted its footprint in the Baltic and Arctic regions and stepped up patrols under the pretext of protecting the areas from an alleged Russian threat.
Korchunov accused NATO of escalating tensions and fueling a “confrontational frenzy” in the Arctic, insisting that Russia poses no threat and has no interest in conflict with Norway or other NATO members, but warning that Moscow “will not leave threats created for us without an adequate response.”
He said NATO, including Norway, had in recent years “rapidly increased” its military presence and operational activity in the north, arguing that under the “frankly far-fetched pretext” of a Russian threat, new command structures and bases were multiplying across the Nordic region “like mushrooms after the rain.”
The development comes as Denmark has bolstered its military presence in and around Greenland since the start of the year, deploying additional ships, aircraft, and personnel as Arctic security tensions mount. The strains followed threats by US President Donald Trump to seize the autonomous Danish territory.
Russia’s Foreign Ministry says NATO’s expanding Arctic footprint is destabilizing and poses a direct threat to national security.
Stuck in Another Disastrous Middle East War
By Ron Paul | March 2, 2026
Unfortunately, President Trump listened to the neocons and Benjamin Netanyahu instead of his MAGA base and other voices of caution as he launched a surprise attack on Iran over the weekend. For the second time in nine months, the US Administration used negotiations with Iran as a cover to launch a pre-planned attack.
Last week’s talks produced “progress” according to all sides, with technical teams set to meet this week to work out the details. President Trump, however, suddenly announced that he was not happy with the talks because the Iranian side refused to say “the magic words” that they would not pursue nuclear weapons.
But Iran has been insisting for decades that they have no interest in producing a nuclear weapon and our own intelligence has confirmed that they are not doing so.
Shortly after President Trump’s announcement, the US and Israel launched their attack, killing Iran’s religious leader along with some 40 other political and military leaders in a “decapitation” strike.
It was supposed to be like the Venezuela operation. Quick and painless for the US. Kill the leadership and the long-suffering people would take to the streets and reclaim their country. It may make a good plot for a Hollywood movie, but in real life these regime change operations have never worked. Millions did take to the streets in Iran, but it was to mourn the slain Ayatollah and to reaffirm support for their government.
Just like we “rallied around the flag” after the attacks on 9/11.
Quickly, Iranian retaliation for the attacks began to take their toll on US assets and Israel. US soldiers have been killed and US fighter jets have been shot down. US bases in the region are either damaged or destroyed. Likewise, US embassies and consulates have come under attack, including by Iraqis likely still furious over the US destruction of their country 20 years ago.
And, with the Pentagon warning that the operation may go weeks instead of days, we are quickly running out of missiles.
Billions of dollars have already been spent on this unprovoked attack, and when the smoke clears – if it does – we may see hundreds of billions or maybe much more having been wasted on yet another Middle East war. Just what President Trump promised he would not do.
The neocon “cakewalk” crowd, including Lindsey Graham and others, have been proven wrong again. Tragically, more American servicemembers may die while the neocons blame someone else for the fiasco they helped launch.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said of the US/Israeli attack that “this combination of forces enables us to do what I have longed to do for 40 years…”
But the purpose of the US military is not to fulfill the decades-old wishes of foreign leaders. There is a good reason we have a Constitution that says only Congress can declare war.
Launching a military strike during negotiations will have lasting negative effects for the United States. Who would ever trust US diplomacy again if talks are used as a distraction for pre-planned attacks?
The Administration is doing its best to spin this unfolding disaster as all going according to plan, but what is the plan? No one knows. Do they know?
Here’s a plan: End this today. Return the destroyed US bases to the countries where they are located. And just come home. That is what a real “America first” movement looks like.
Iran posed no imminent threat to US: Pentagon tells Congress
Press TV – March 2, 2026
As US-Israeli military aggression against Iran continues, Pentagon staff have acknowledged that there was no military threat from Tehran towards US bases and forces in West Asia prior to US aggression, contradicting claims by senior administration officials that Washington started the aggression to prevent Tehran from targeting American interests in the region.
Pentagon staff acknowledged during a congressional briefing on Sunday that Iran was not planning to strike US forces or bases in West Asia unless Israel attacked Iran first, according to multiple people who attended the session.
The acknowledgement undercuts the administration of US President Donald Trump’s false allegations that Iran was planning to preemptively strike US forces and bases.
During several interviews on Saturday, senior administration officials claimed that Israel and the US attacked Iran because they had allegedly received information that Iran was planning to create mass casualty scenario by preemptively striking US bases in the region.
Several American news outlets reported on Saturday that there was no verifiable information or intelligence to support the Trump administration’s false narrative.
During the session, Pentagon had told Congress that Iran’s ballistic missile program and resistance groups across the region posed a threat to US interests.
Sources, however, noted Iran had never used its military capabilities preemptively, but only as a deterrent, as was the case during the 12-day war in July of 2025. As such, the threat of war being initiated by Iran was not true and the Trump administration could not factually support its reasoning for the military aggression against Iran.
The Pentagon had also told Congress that its goal during the first two days of war was to destroy Iran’s air defense and command and control nodes; however since the beginning of the aggression the Israeli and US forces have repeatedly attacked civilian infrastructure, including a school which resulted in the killing of more than 150 students.
When asked about Pentagon staff undercutting the administration rationale, White House spokesperson Dylan Johnson claimed that the briefers had “briefed the bipartisan staffs of several national security committees in both chambers for over 90 minutes on the military action in Iran.”
The US and Israel started a new round of aerial aggression against Iran on Saturday, eight months after they launched unprovoked attacks on the country.
Iran has swiftly and decisively retaliated against the strikes by launching barrages of missile and drones against Israeli-occupied territories as well as on US bases in region.
Iran’s Missile Might vs. America’s Arsenal: Who Will Run Out First?
Sputnik – 02.03.2026
“If the US continues to use its missiles in such a manner, their stockpile will swiftly run out,” Russian military expert Yuri Knutov tells Sputnik, commenting on a recent video of apparently 10 Patriot interceptors downing just one Iranian ballistic missile.
Knutov explains that the US missile stockpile includes about 400 Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) interceptors, which “may be already exhausted in 10 days even if they are used properly.”
“As for Patriot interceptors, their larger stockpile could be exhausted in around three weeks, especially if 10 such missiles are launched to hit one Iranian air target,” the expert points out.
According to him, the US quickly increasing the production of the aforementioned missiles is unrealistic, given that the monthly output currently stands at merely 55, which is “not serious.”
Iran’s ‘Trump Card’
“So, Iran now has a very important trump card. By strategically using its ballistic missiles and saving the advanced hypersonic Fateh missiles for the final stage, Tehran has a chance to deal a very painful blow to Israel and the US and avenge the surprise attack on the Islamic Republic,” the expert notes.
He says that when it comes to Iranian ballistic missiles, they might not be exhausted for another month, and despite their low accuracy, the mass use of this munition yields results.
“Out of a large number of launched missiles, one or two hit their targets, which is a significant result. It creates a psychological effect and, in turn, impacts the enemy’s morale. Therefore, when we talk about Iran’s use of ballistic missiles, this tactic has so far proven effective,” Knutov concludes.
Daniel Davis: U.S. Miscalculation – War Not Going as Planned
Glenn Diesen | March 1, 2026
Lt. Col. Daniel Davis is a 4x combat veteran, the recipient of the Ridenhour Prize for Truth-Telling, and is the host of the Daniel Davis Deep Dive YouTube channel. After the second day of the war, Lt. Col. Davis discusses why the war against Iran is not going as planned and Iran has too many advantages.
Daniel Davis Deep Dive: 
/ @danieldavisdeepdive
Follow Prof. Glenn Diesen:
Substack: https://glenndiesen.substack.com/
X/Twitter: https://x.com/Glenn_Diesen
Patreon: 
/ glenndiesen
Support the research by Prof. Glenn Diesen: PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/glenn…
Buy me a Coffee: buymeacoffee.com/gdieseng Go Fund Me: https://gofund.me/09ea012f
Books by Prof. Glenn Diesen: https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/…
Trump bit off more than he can chew with Iran – ex-Pentagon analyst
RT | March 1, 2026
The US-Israeli strikes on Iran are unlikely to trigger regime change and risk escalating into a wider geopolitical confrontation, former Pentagon security policy analyst Michael Maloof has told RT.
Washington and West Jerusalem launched what they described as a “preemptive” attack on the Islamic Republic after nuclear talks failed to produce a breakthrough, prompting retaliation from Iran. Tehran responded with missile and drone strikes targeting Israel and US military bases across the region.
In an interview with RT on Saturday, Maloof said the timing of the attack had likely been finalized during Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Mar-a-Lago on February 12, despite President Donald Trump publicly insisting that negotiations with Tehran were ongoing.
“The United States has always done Israel’s bidding. Netanyahu basically controls Trump,” Maloof claimed, adding that the US president has effectively pursued the Israeli PM’s vision of “a greater Israel to encompass all the Arab countries.”
Trump openly declared his goal to force regime change in Tehran, but efforts to topple Iran’s government would face major obstacles, according to Maloof.
“Regime change is something that is going to be difficult, especially in Iran, where they’re very, very set. They have a government in place,” he said. Even with the killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps would likely keep the country functioning as a “cohesive nation-state.”
At the same time, he described the strikes as part of a broader strategic confrontation extending beyond Iran’s nuclear or missile programs, noting how the US president has been openly critical of BRICS and China’s Belt and Road Initiative.
“And Iran just happened to be a very critical component to that, with Russia and with China,” Maloof said. “I think Trump bit off more than he could chew on this one.”
“These attacks are gonna affect the whole economic world order, literally overnight. So we’re in for a long, hard slug here,” Maloof said, adding that “it’s easy to start a war, but [it’s harder to know] how to stop one.”
Unexpected Iranian reaction paralyzed Americans and Israelis on the first day of war
By Lucas Leiroz | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 1, 2026
The recent military escalation in the Middle East revealed a strategic miscalculation on the part of Washington and Tel Aviv. By launching a direct offensive against Iran, authorities in the United States and Israel apparently assumed that Tehran would repeat the pattern observed in previous confrontations: initial restraint, calibrated retaliation, and delayed timing. This pattern was evident both during the so-called Twelve-Day War and in earlier episodes of Israeli aggression against Iranian targets and regional allies. This time, however, the calculation proved mistaken.
The central element of the initial strategy appears to have been a classic attempt at “decapitation,” targeting the Supreme Leader, his family, and other high-level figures. The underlying logic is well known: by removing the apex of decision-making authority, internal disorganization, succession disputes, and operational paralysis would follow. This approach is recurrent in Western military doctrine, especially when directed against states considered systemic adversaries.
However, this type of strategy tends to fail when applied to highly institutionalized states equipped with complex political-military structures. Iran is not a fragile entity dependent on a single personal command center. It is a system with multiple layers of authority, defined chains of succession, and deep integration between the state apparatus, regular armed forces, and parallel security structures. Moreover, it is a civilization with millennia of historical continuity, whose contemporary political identity was consolidated precisely under external pressure. The elimination of an individual leader, even if symbolically significant, does not automatically dismantle a state with this degree of structural cohesion.
What surprised analysts was the speed of the Iranian reaction. Unlike what occurred during the Twelve-Day War, this time retaliation was immediate and multifaceted. Within the first hours after the attacks, Iran launched a series of simultaneous operations against American military installations across the Middle East. Bases used by U.S. forces were struck with missiles and drones in coordinated actions aimed at saturating defense systems and reducing interception capacity.
At the same time, Israeli defensive systems were placed under pressure through multiple and forceful attacks. Iran’s strategy was not limited to a symbolic gesture; it represented a deliberate attempt to impose immediate and visible costs, altering adversaries’ perception of risk. Throughout the first day of confrontation, the operational tempo remained constant, creating an environment of heightened uncertainty for the Zionist regime.
The multiplicity of vectors employed – different launch platforms, varied trajectories, and synchronized timing – contributed to confusion among military planners in Washington and Tel Aviv. By all indications, such a bold and rapid action was not anticipated. The assumption that Tehran would hesitate, seek mediation, or respond in a limited fashion proved incorrect. Instead, Iran sought to demonstrate its capacity for strategic coordination under maximum pressure.
This behavior suggests that Iranian authorities internalized relevant lessons from recent conflicts. Delays in responding, observed in previous episodes, were interpreted by adversaries as signs of strategic restraint or operational limitation. By opting for an immediate and comprehensive reaction, Tehran sought to redefine the rules of engagement and establish a new threshold of deterrence.
The psychological impact should not be underestimated. Continuous attacks throughout the first day reportedly generated confusion and near paralysis within certain Israeli and American decision-making circles. When multiple fronts are activated simultaneously, the ability to prioritize strategically becomes far more complex, if not effectively impossible.
It now remains to be seen how escalation will unfold in the coming days. Iran’s initial response altered the immediate balance but does not end the cycle of action and reaction. Washington and Tel Aviv face the classic dilemma between expanding the offensive – risking a large-scale regional conflict – or seeking indirect channels of containment. The first day demonstrated that the scenario evolved beyond initial expectations. From this point forward, each additional move may redefine not only the military dynamic but the broader security architecture of the entire Middle East.
Featured Video
US Blockade on Iran Just Triggered Iran’s HARSHEST Response Yet
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
Book Review
On Herd Mentality
By Jeb Smith | April 14, 2026
I no longer trust “we the people,” because of the powers influencing them. Media and government schooling form their general ideas on reality and governance. Therefore, it’s not a case of the voter choosing the politicians. Instead, the system is conditioning and conforming the voter to the authorities’ desires.
In democracies, the people are kept occupied working and paying taxes, too busy to acquire information outside the approved sources. You will find they know and care far more about the next iPhone than political philosophy. Of those who hold some interest, 95% just toe the party line, holding the same opinion as the primary media source they listen to. They lack both the desire and time to expand their horizons.
Media’s purpose is to conform people’s thought to a preferred goal, which is why Republican and Democratic voters both firmly hold their parties’ general stances, reciting the same talking points. The people do not originate ideas; their thoughts are fed to them by the media so they can consume, digest, and parrot back whatever they are served. When it comes to politics, we rarely think for ourselves. We are told what to think.
Watch PBS, MSNBC and read your local newspaper for six months, and you will receive a particular view and understanding of the world. Then listen to The Mike Church Show, The Blaze, and The Daily Wire, and you will get not just another perspective but a whole different world of facts and events. The world people believe they live in can be entirely different depending on their news sources.
We enjoy seeing the enemy humiliated, which describes why those engulfed in politics love their preferred media sources; they keep returning for more like a drug addict. Networks ensure their “experts” align with the worldview they and their audience desire. The people who watch PBS, BBC, and so forth expect a specific perspective to be presented. Fox News watchers demand the same. In doing this, we both encourage and assure we are misled.
In their book Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government, professors Christopher H. Achen and Larry M. Bartels argue, based on substantial research, that voters do not decide the party platform and agenda. Instead, the parties control the “ideologies” of the voters. When the party the voter identifies with changes its position, the individuals also change theirs. They discovered the individual would quickly adopt the views of their group; they will ignore or change their own opinions over time to fit in with the collective they identify with. Achen and Bartels wrote “group memberships largely drove policy views, not vice versa.” … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Villains of Judea: Charles Bronfman
- Seyed M. Marandi: US Blockade on Iran Just Triggered Iran’s HARSHEST Response Yet
- The new assault of the Zionist lobby in Brazil
- Italy suspends defense deal with ‘Israel’ over war on Iran, Lebanon
- Indonesia Agrees to Receive Oil, Gas Supplies From Russia – Indonesian Energy Ministry
- Saudi Arabia Urges US Back to Iran Talks as Other Oil Routes Face Risk
- Iran demands reparations from Arab states
- Tankers transit Strait of Hormuz amid US attempt to impose blockade, data shows
- US Strikes Kill Five in Alleged Pacific Anti-drug Campaign
- EU Defense Agency head says compulsory military service could be necessary
- If Americans Knew
- ‘Not Acceptable’: President of Iran Condemns Trump For His ‘Desecration of Jesus, the Prophet of Peace’
- We Are the Barbarians
- Netanyahu Says the Trump Administration Gives Him Reports on Iran Talks Every Day
- Second Contractor Steps Forward to Blow the Whistle on Israeli Attacks at Gaza Aid Site
- Mighty Israel wants all of its neighbors to be defenseless – Daily Update
- Emergency waivers move arms for Israel, UAE to speed lane
- Caitlin Johnstone: Nobody’s “Obsessed” With Israel — It’s Just A Uniquely Horrible Country
- Israel’s Ben Gvir says he feels like the ‘owner’ of Al-Aqsa Mosque
- History of flotilla campaigns to end Israel’s siege of Gaza
- Humanitarian Scorecard: Six Months In, Gaza Ceasefire is Failing
- No Tricks Zone
- Cave Discovery Reveals Today’s Desert Climates Were Recently Far Warmer, Wetter, Teeming With Life
- German Expert: Heat Dome Led To Record Temps In Western USA…Warmer In 1934, 1936
- New Study: No Linear Warming Or Glacier Retreat Along Northern Antarctic Peninsula Since 1980s
- An Inconvenient Tree: Uncovered In Alps… Europe Much Warmer Than Today 6000 Years Ago
- New Study Reports A 60% Slowdown In Greenland’s Ice Loss Rate In The Last Decade
- Low Intensity Tornado Wrecks Major Solar Farm, Creating A Potential Toxic Dump
- New Study Finds Warming Saves Lives…Cold Temperatures 12 Times More Deadly Than Excess Heat
- German Science Blog Accuses PIK Climate Institute Of Hallucinating Climate Tipping Points
- Devastating Assessment Of Comirnaty Vaccine By Former Senior Pfizer Europe Toxicologist
- New Study: CO2 Is ‘Effectively Negligible’ As An Explanatory Climate Change Factor Since 2000
Aletho News 