Op. True Promise 4: Iran’s missile blitzkrieg dismantles US war machine in West Asia
By Ivan Kesic | Press TV | March 10, 2026
In just ten days, Iran’s military response to the Israeli-American war of aggression has dismantled the core of US power in the Persian Gulf, from Qatar’s Al-Udeid Air Base to the US Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain.
What began on February 28, 2026, as the ill-fated “Operation Epic Fury” has spiraled into a strategic catastrophe for the US military-industrial complex.
The aggression, which led to the martyrdom of the Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, as well as ordinary civilians, has been met with one of the most devastating and precisely coordinated military campaigns in modern regional history.
Systematically, Iranian missiles and drones have pierced American air defenses, reducing over a dozen military installations to rubble, obliterating advanced radar systems, and crippling US naval power.
Thousands of American personnel now confront an undeniable reality: their assets are no longer safe from Iran’s formidable and far-reaching arsenal.
US military web in the Persian Gulf
To fully grasp the magnitude of Iran’s military achievements, one must first understand the intricate web of US military power that has for decades strangled the Persian Gulf region.
This network has served as the primary instrument of US hegemony over the world’s most vital energy resources and the principal military guarantee for the security of the Zionist entity.
At the apex of this system sits Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar. A sprawling facility covering approximately fifty square kilometers southwest of Doha, it stands as the largest American military installation in the entire West Asia and the forward headquarters of United States Central Command.
Al-Udeid is the cornerstone of US military strategy in the region, housing over ten thousand personnel and supporting the 379th Air Expeditionary Wing. Its formidable array of bombers, fighter aircraft, surveillance platforms, and drones has, for years, been the launchpad for aggressive operations against regional nations.
Less than two hundred and fifty kilometers from Al-Udeid lies Al-Dhafra Air Base in the United Arab Emirates. This installation complements its Qatari counterpart by providing the United States with advanced intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities.
Al-Dhafra hosts approximately five thousand active-duty US military personnel assigned to the 380th Air Expeditionary Wing.
Their primary missions include aerial refueling and high-altitude intelligence gathering, utilizing platforms such as the Lockheed U-2 Dragon Lady, the Boeing E-3 Sentry AWACS, and the RQ-4 Global Hawk surveillance drones – aircraft that have routinely violated Iranian airspace along the Persian Gulf coast.
The base achieved particular notoriety in 2019 when one of its Global Hawk drones was shot down by Iran’s air defense system, an episode that foreshadowed the far greater defeats to come.
In Bahrain, the Naval Support Activity in Manama serves as the headquarters for both US Naval Forces Central Command and the United States Fifth Fleet.
Supporting over nine thousand military personnel and more than one hundred tenant commands, this facility, established on the grounds of the former British Royal Navy base HMS Juffair, provides the logistical and command infrastructure necessary for the Fifth Fleet to project power throughout the region with its carrier strike groups and supporting vessels.
Kuwait hosts yet another crucial node. Camp Arifjan serves as the primary forward logistics hub for American ground forces, while Ali Al-Salem Air Base hosts the 386th Air Expeditionary Wing, and Mohammed Al-Ahmad Naval Base provides critical naval infrastructure.
This was the fortress America had built, a ring of steel and fire meant to contain and intimidate. And this is the fortress that Iran has just shattered.
Initial wave: Iran’s devastating response to US-Israeli aggression
When the US and the Israeli regime launched their cowardly aggression against Iranian territory on February 28, assassinating Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and more than two hundred Iranian civilians, including 165 schoolgirls in the city of Minab, they evidently believed that such a devastating blow would leave Iran paralyzed.
The school was attacked twice by the US missiles, debunking the claim that it was not deliberate. As experts noted, the same site cannot be mistakenly targeted twice.
Within hours of the initial wave of aggression, the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) launched Operation True Promise 4, a meticulously planned retaliation that simultaneously targeted more than a dozen American military installations across the region.
At Al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar, Iranian missiles struck with devastating precision. Their impacts were captured on video and broadcast by multiple news agencies. The most significant achievement was the complete destruction of the AN/FPS-132 Upgraded Early Warning Radar, a system valued at approximately $1.1 billion that served as the electronic eye of American air defense throughout the Persian Gulf.
This fixed UHF phased-array radar, designed to detect and continuously track ballistic missiles at extremely long ranges, represented the most critical component of the US early warning architecture in West Asia.
Its obliteration rendered the entire American air defense network effectively blind, forcing surviving batteries to operate with degraded situational awareness and dramatically reducing their effectiveness against subsequent Iranian strikes.
Simultaneously, Iranian missiles and kamikaze drones descended upon Al-Dhafra Air Base in the UAE, destroying the American terrorists’ air warfare center, satellite communication center, early warning radars, and fire control radars, effectively decapitating the base’s command and control capabilities.
The Lockheed U-2 reconnaissance aircraft, Boeing E-3 Sentry AWACS, and RQ-4 Global Hawk drones found themselves without the supporting infrastructure necessary for their operations. Their hangars were damaged or destroyed, their crews scrambling to survive the onslaught.
The strikes extended to the naval infrastructure. At Jebel Ali Port in Dubai, which is the most frequent port of call for US Navy vessels outside the American homeland, Iranian missiles caused significant damage to facilities used for resupplying and maintaining the Fifth Fleet’s warships.
In Bahrain, the headquarters of the United States Fifth Fleet came under direct attack, with multiple missiles and kamikaze drones striking the Naval Support Activity facility.
Video clips captured the moment of impact as projectiles struck buildings within the base complex, including a high-rise structure housing American troops.
The IRGC announced that a service center for the Fifth Fleet had been specifically targeted, and subsequent attacks on March 1 would hit an unnamed US naval command and backup center with two ballistic missiles.
Kuwait’s American installations suffered perhaps the most complete destruction. Ali Al-Salem Air Base, struck on February 28, came under renewed attack on March 1.
The IRGC subsequently declared that the base had been rendered completely out of service. This facility, home to the US Air Force’s 386th Air Expeditionary Wing, was effectively neutralized as a military asset: its runways cratered, its hangars destroyed, its aircraft either damaged or forced to flee. The Mohammed Al-Ahmad Naval Base suffered an equally devastating fate, with three naval infrastructure structures reportedly destroyed.
In a matter of hours, the elaborate fortress America had spent decades building had been shattered.
Strategic significance of America’s lost assets
The full measure of Iran’s military achievement becomes apparent only when one considers what these destroyed facilities actually meant to American strategic power.
The AN/FPS-132 radar at Al-Udeid was not merely an expensive piece of equipment, but the keystone of the entire American air defense architecture in the Persian Gulf.
Without it, the Patriot and THAAD batteries scattered across the Persian Gulf states became fundamentally degraded. Forced to rely on their own shorter-range sensors, they were rendered far more vulnerable to saturation attacks.
The destruction of this single system effectively crippled the integrated air defense network that the United States had spent decades constructing.
Al-Dhafra’s destroyed command and control centers represented an equally significant loss. These facilities were the nerve centers through which American intelligence operations across the Persian Gulf were coordinated.
The satellite communication center had been the primary link transmitting data from surveillance aircraft to analysis centers; its loss temporarily blinded American intelligence collectors across the region.
The damage inflicted upon the Fifth Fleet’s headquarters in Bahrain disrupted the command infrastructure necessary for coordinating carrier strike groups and support vessels across an area encompassing the Persian Gulf, Red Sea, and Arabian Sea.
Without this hub, the fleet’s ability to project power became fundamentally compromised.
The destruction at Jebel Ali Port compounded these difficulties by damaging the primary logistics hub through which the Fifth Fleet received supplies and maintenance support.
A fleet without fuel, without spare parts, without the means to sustain prolonged operations, is little more than a collection of floating metal.
In a single night, Iran did not merely strike American bases; it dismantled the architecture of American power in the region. The radar that saw everything was blinded.
The centers that coordinated everything were silenced. The ports that sustained everything were crippled. The fleet that dominated everything was paralyzed.
Continuing campaign: Sustained pressure on US positions
The second phase of the retaliatory military campaign unfolded on March 8 and 9, with fresh strikes targeting key American installations in the region.
Al-Udeid Air Base came under renewed attack on March 8, with loud blasts and sirens reported. The Qatari Ministry of Defense subsequently acknowledged the strikes, though Iranian military sources framed them as direct hits on the key command hub.
The fact that attacks continued despite Qatari interception claims suggested that many missiles and drones were still getting through. The following day, March 9, Al-Udeid was struck again, with explosions rocking the base for the second consecutive day and verified reports confirming impacts.
The Juffair Naval Base in Bahrain was also targeted on March 8. The IRGC announced a direct strike in retaliation for a US attack on an Iranian desalination plant on Qeshm Island earlier the same day. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that the United States had set the precedent by hitting civilian infrastructure, which made Iran’s response more legitimate.
Ali Al-Salem Air Base in Kuwait, already severely damaged in earlier strikes, came under drone attack on March 8. The Islamic Resistance in Iraq claimed responsibility for an operation that allegedly breached Kuwaiti air defenses and hit the installation.
The Prince Sultan Air Base near Al-Kharj in Saudi Arabia was targeted with a volley of ballistic missiles. Although Saudi forces claimed to have intercepted three missiles heading for the base, the installation still suffered significant damage.
Iran’s military-technological triumph
The past 10-11 days of combat have demonstrated conclusively that Iranian military technology has reached a level of sophistication American strategists never anticipated.
Iranian missiles have consistently penetrated American air defenses, striking their targets with precision that rivals, or exceeds, that of US weapons, as experts acknowledge.
Iranian drones have swarmed American bases in numbers that defensive systems simply cannot engage. The destruction of the AN/FPS-132 radar represents perhaps the most significant single technological achievement of the campaign: a billion-dollar system, specifically designed to detect and track missiles like those Iran fired at it, proved utterly incapable of preventing its own destruction.
The performance of Iranian anti-ship missiles against American naval assets, including the reported strike on a US Navy combat support warship, further demonstrates the comprehensive nature of Iran’s capabilities.
No domain, whether air, land, or sea, has remained immune this time.
Beyond technology, the sustained nature of the Iranian campaign reveals logistical and industrial capacities that the US clearly did not anticipate. Iran has fired hundreds of missiles and drones while maintaining the ability to continue such strikes indefinitely, a feat that suggests a production capacity Western intelligence had catastrophically underestimated.
American forces, by contrast, have expended enormous quantities of interceptors attempting to defend against Iranian attacks, depleting stocks that will take years to replenish.
The economics of this war are as devastating as its tactics: a missile that costs Iran a few hundred thousand dollars is met by an interceptor that costs America several million. This is a war of attrition that the United States cannot win.
The technological edge upon which American military dominance has rested for decades has been revealed as a myth in these 11 days. The industrial capacity that was supposed to guarantee American superiority has been exposed as insufficient. And the will to sustain a prolonged war in the face of mounting losses has yet to be tested.
Humiliation of American power
Beyond the purely military dimensions lies the broader strategic impact on American military prestige throughout West Asia, carefully built over the decades, military experts say.
The US has presented itself as the indispensable guarantor of security in the Persian Gulf, the force whose military might ensures the free flow of oil and the stability of friendly regimes.
The events of the past 11 days have exposed this narrative as hollow propaganda, revealing that American power rests not on invincible capability but on the absence of serious challenge.
The Persian Gulf Arab states that have hosted American bases now find themselves in an impossible position, their territories transformed into battlegrounds, their air defense systems exposed as ineffective, their American protectors revealed as vulnerable.
The casualties inflicted upon American forces, estimated in the hundreds by Iranian military sources, represent a human cost that will reverberate through American society.
American families are receiving notification that their loved ones will not return from a war that Washington started and cannot win, a source told the Press TV website.
The images of destroyed bases, burning aircraft, and fleeing personnel convey a message more powerful than any official statement: the United States is not winning this war.
New strategic reality
As the imposed war enters its second week, a new strategic reality has emerged in West Asia, one in which American military dominance has been shattered and Iranian power stands ascendant, military experts note.
“The United States can no longer guarantee the security of its bases in the Persian Gulf. It cannot protect its warships from Iranian missiles. It cannot conduct intelligence operations along Iranian coasts without risking the destruction of its most valuable platforms,” a highly placed military source told the Press TV website.
“The carefully constructed edifice of American military power has been revealed as a house of cards, collapsing at the first serious challenge.”
For Iran, he noted, these military achievements represent not merely a successful retaliation but a strategic victory that fundamentally transforms the entire regional security environment.
The Islamic Republic, through these 34 waves of Operation True Promise 4 (and counting), has demonstrated capabilities that will deter American aggression for years to come.
“The message from Tehran to Washington could not be clearer: the era of American dominance in West Asia has ended. Any future aggression against the Islamic Republic will be met with responses far more devastating than anything yet seen,” the source said.
Spare the hypocrisy: Baghaei slams Ursula’s support for US
Al Mayadeen | March 10, 2026
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei sharply criticized Ursula von der Leyen in a post on X, accusing her of hypocrisy and of supporting US and Israeli “crimes of aggression” against Iran.
In his post, Baghaei urged von der Leyen to “spare the hypocrisy,” accusing her of repeatedly taking stances that align with occupation, genocide, and atrocities, further accusing her of “laundering” US and Israeli war crimes against Iranians.
Baghaei also questioned the European Commission president’s silence over recent civilian casualties in Iran, stating, “Where was your voice when more than 165 innocent IRANIAN little angels were massacred in the city of Minab?”
The spokesperson highlighted the hypocrisy in von der Leyen’s speech, asking, “Why don’t you say anything when hospitals, historical sites, oil facilities, diplomatic police headquarter, firefighting stations and residential neighborhoods are wickedly targeted?”
“Silence in the face of lawlessness and atrocity is nothing less than complicity,” Baghaei wrote, urging von der Leyen to review the public responses to her own post to see what people “really think” about what he called the “whitewashing of criminals.”
The exchange comes as the US-Israeli war on Iran continues to escalate, with strikes on Iran killing hundreds of civilians since February 28.
40 people killed in one strike
The US-Israeli aggression against Iran continued on March 9, targeting the capital Tehran, as well as several cities and provinces across the country.
Iranian media reported that strikes in Tehran hit residential buildings in the Meydan-e Resalat area, with preliminary reports indicating the martyrdom of 40 people, including several children.
According to Al Mayadeen’s correspondent in Tehran, a series of US and Israeli strikes also targeted the vicinity of Mehrabad International Airport, located west of the capital.
Air defense systems were repeatedly activated over the city to intercept drones and other hostile aerial targets, the correspondent said.
The governor of Tehran confirmed that some attacks struck residential areas and hospitals, stressing that despite the strikes, the capital remains stable.
190 minors, 200 women killed by US, ‘Israel’
Meanwhile, the head of the Iranian Emergency Organization revealed that 190 of those martyred since the start of the war were under the age of 18, while 700 wounded were also minors, including 60 children under the age of five.
He added that 200 females have been martyred, including an eight-month-old infant, while 1,402 women have been injured.
The official also reported damage to 29 hospitals, 41 health units, and 18 emergency centers.
Trump press conference reveals a man who wants out of war
By Trita Parsi | Responsible Statecraft | March 9, 2026
Trump’s “all over the place” press conference at his Miami resort on Monday appears to have had two key objectives: a) Calm the markets by signalling the conflict may soon be over because it has been so “successful,” and b) Prepare the ground for Trump ending the war through a unilateral declaration of victory.
Though ending a war that never should have been started in the first place — rather than fighting it endlessly in the pursuit of an illusory victory as the U.S. did in Afghanistan — is the right move, it won’t be as easy as Trump appears to think.
Tehran also has a vote — and there is little to suggest that it will agree that the war is over.
Tehran objects to what it would consider a premature ceasefire out of fear that it would only give the U.S. and Israel time to regroup, rearm, and then re-attack Iran. For the conflict to be ripe for a ceasefire, Tehran believes that enough cost must have been inflicted on the U.S., regional states, Israel, and on the global economy that all states conclude that starting the war was a mistake — and as a result, no state will seek to restart it.
Moreover, if the war ends now, Iran will be in a worse situation than it was before the start of the war. Much of its infrastructure has been destroyed, its missile capabilities have taken hits, its ability to export oil has been damaged, and most crucially, its prospects for sanctions relief have been obliterated. Indeed, who will and can help rebuild Iran under these circumstances?
This would leave Iran not only in a weakened position but also in a continuously weakening state. Which, in turn, would make another war of aggression by the U.S. and Israel more, not less, likely, since it is Iran’s perceived weakness that prompted Trump and Israel to see an opportunity for war.
As such, it appears likely that Iran will continue to target Israel, even if the U.S. declares victory and withdraws its military. Even GCC states may continue to be targeted. And Tehran will very likely try to keep the Straits of Hormuz shut. (At least for now, there are no signs that Tehran has lost its ability to do these things).
This will create a dilemma for Trump. It will be difficult for him to stay out while Iran and Israel continue to go at each other. But if he reenters the war, the hollowness of his declared victory will have been revealed. Markets will react negatively, and all the costs Trump is currently trying to avoid will likely intensify dramatically.
Iran, of course, does not want, nor can it afford, an endless war. But it will likely demand some significant steps in order to accept a ceasefire. This may include a commitment from Trump not to restart the war (though I don’t understand the value of such a commitment). But more importantly, it will likely require sanctions relief and release of its frozen funds abroad.
Trump will, of course, bark, but if the outcome is continued war, that will put a lot of pressure on him. Here, the role of some GCC states may prove crucial due to their willingness and ability to find an arrangement that could leave both Trump and Iran feeling that they “won.”
Whether Israel will allow that to happen, of course, is a different matter.
Trita Parsi is the co-founder and Executive Vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.
When Tel Aviv decides, Washington fights
By Jamal Kanj | MEMO | March 9, 2026
American taxpayers are still hemorrhaging from the made-for-Israel war in Iraq, a war audaciously offered as one that would “pay for itself.” Instead, it was paid in Iraqi and American blood, ruins and financed by American debt. The promised democracy was a broken state, regional chaos, and the afterbirth of terror and resistance that continues to metastasize across the Arab world. Marketed as a short, decisive campaign, Iraq became a two-decade-long disaster with no exit in sight. Trillions were burned on lies manufactured by Israel-first Zionists in Washington, while generations of Americans—many not even born when the invasion began—were conscripted into inheriting the debt, the interest, and the moral stain.
The real balance sheet of that war is etched into nearly 5,000 American tombstones and the endless corridors of veterans’ hospitals. Before that blood-soaked bill is even paid, the very same architect, using the same lies, has succeeded again in dragging the U. S. into another made-for-Israel war, this time against Iran. Iraq was not an aberration; it was a rehearsal. Yet, Iran doesn’t appear to be the final act on the Israeli menu. In recent weeks, former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett declared that Turkey is next. And it is the U.S., not Israel, that is expected to keep paying for wars, America neither needed nor chose.
The evidence of who set the clock of this war is unmistakable. The most revealing admission did not come from Tehran, Moscow, or Beijing, but from the U.S. State Department. In an unguarded moment, the U.S. Secretary of State admitted that the timing of this war was not an American choice. This became painfully clear when the State Department was caught unprepared to help evacuate tens of thousands of Americans from the war zone.
As U.S. ambassadors hurried to evacuate their staff and families, desperate citizens were told their government could not assist and were advised to arrange their own departures, after airports had already closed.
This is not a minor detail. It’s a government that is willing to sacrifice the well-being and security of its citizens by joining a war decided by someone else. It goes to the heart of sovereignty and democratic accountability. A nation that chooses to go to war prepares its people, its diplomacy, and its logistics. A nation that is dragged into war improvises and hopes for the best.
Iran, for its part, is not the caricature often presented by the American Secretary of War and Donald Trump. It is a country prepared for drawn-out conflict and strategic patience. During the nearly eight-year Iran-Iraq War, Tehran fought a grinding, no-win war against a better-armed adversary. Against the expectations of Western military analysts, Iran endured. In a grim irony, it even committed the greatest of all sins: purchasing weapons from Israel, falling into Tel Aviv’s cynical strategy to weaken both Baghdad and Tehran simultaneously. Israel was willing to arm its supposed arch-enemy as part of its broader calculus of exhaustion and division.
That history matters today. Iran has demonstrated, repeatedly, a willingness to absorb punishment, and extend conflicts over time. At the end of the day, and by all means necessary, Iran is unlikely to surrender. In a protracted war of attrition to bleed the world economy, Tehran could move to close the Strait of Hormuz, an oil blood line for world economies. Iran may be economically battered, and it has been for decades under severe sanctions, but that very weakness reduces its restraint. A country with little left to lose is more inclined to impose pain on others, including Western and neighboring welfare oil economies dependent on uninterrupted energy exports.
Meanwhile, regional instability in the Gulf and prolonged American entanglement create the perfect parasitic symbiosis for Israel: a state that flourishes in the shadows of regional chaos like a scavenger thriving on the scrap of a landfill.
President Trump has suggested escorting oil shipments in the Strait to keep the oil flowing. The macho bravado may play well on television or for the stock market, but history, old and recent, offers daunting realities. The same was attempted during the Iraq-Iran war in the 1980s but failed. More recently, the U.S., the EU, and Israel combined failed to force a much smaller and poorer country—Yemen—to open the Red Sea. After months of bombardment, siege and naval pressure, Washington was forced into negotiations, and even then, Yemeni forces continued to block vessels linked to Israel until Gaza ceasefire.
The comparison is useful. The shorelines area under the Houthi control of the Red Sea (green map in the link) in the north of Yemen, is a much wider maritime passage. The Strait of Hormuz, by contrast, is so narrow in a clear day each shore is visible from the other. To borrow a simple image, in the Houthi area the width of the Red Sea is an Amazon River and where Hormuz is a stream. The narrowness of the Hormuz Strait makes control easier for Iran and exposes the vulnerability of U.S. naval ships. Before promising to escort commercial shipping, a responsible administration should ask a basic question: if a small, impoverished Yemen could not be subdued by the world’s most powerful militaries, how exactly will American warships be safer under the reach of fire in the narrower Strait?
There is another question Washington refuses to entertain: How will Americans feel when they realize they are risking lives, ships, and economic stability largely to advance Israel’s sole strategic objectives?
This is not an abstract question. It is a political and economic reckoning, purposefully delayed. Especially since Americans are still reeling from the cost of previous Israeli wars, and now, they are asked to take on a new national debt—$200 billion—to bankroll yet another war, especially made for Israel.
The made-for-Israel wars may have begun in Iraq but will not end with Iran. Israeli false flags are poised to provoke further escalations designed to entrap even states traditionally friendly to Tehran, such as Oman. For Israel, victory remains incomplete unless it drags Gulf Arab states into open confrontation with Iran, hardening divisions that may last generations. Iranian mistrust of the Gulf Arabs would likely endure even in the event of regime change. In this calculus, Israel “wins” not only on the battlefield, but by entrenching lasting hostility between Iran and the Arab world, ensuring a permanently fragmented region.
More than two decades ago, the illegal war against Iraq was cooked in the dens of the Pentagon by Israel-first ideologues and sold to the American public through the managed media, ruse and weapons of mass deception. The current war is, in some ways, even more brazen. It was exclusively designed in the war ministry offices of Tel Aviv, and Trump obliged.
This is not America’s war. The decision was made elsewhere, and timed elsewhere, fought on behalf of someone else to serve the strategic objectives of a foreign country. Washington has subordinated the American national interest to the tribal agenda of Israeli-firsters inside the Beltway. Simply put: Tel Aviv chooses the war, and Washington pays the bill.
How Iran’s Toxic Rain Reveals US-Israel Discord
By Ekaterina Blinova – Sputnik – 09.03.2026
The main Israeli goal is to cause as much chaos as possible and draw the US even deeper into the war, security expert Dr Simon Tsipis tells Sputnik.
US Energy Secretary Chris Wright accused Israel of bombing Iranian fuel depots, insisting the US targets no energy facilities.
Axios reports that the US was informed ahead of the Israeli attacks, but the huge scale of damage shocked Washington. The attack caused an environmental disaster with black acid rain in Tehran.
This situation reveals a divide between the allies, Tsipis said:
- Israeli forces behind Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu want to trigger a full-scale war in the Persian Gulf
- The US realizes it has been drawn into a project that has nothing to do with its own goals
“Israel has effectively set a trap for its long-time allies among American Christian evangelicals,” Tsipis says. “A strong opposition is growing within the US, openly declaring that the current course does not serve the nation’s interests.”
The US is taking most of the blame with Israel’s role forgotten, the pundit says.
“This creates enormous reputational risks for the US, turning it into a hostage of someone else’s strategy,” Tsipis says, “one that brings no benefit to the White House while forcing it to bear all the costs of supporting the conflict.”
Consequences:
- A regional conflict escalates into a global threat
- The US is caught in a strategic trap
- US allies in Europe are caught in a deepening crisis
- A rift is growing inside the US
- The reputational damage will have long-term consequences for US influence in the world
Possible Scenarios for the Middle East
By Yuriy Zinin – New Eastern Outlook – March 9, 2026
The US and Israeli aggression against Iran has pushed the Middle East to the verge of exploding. It has ignited regional media discourse, which presents various assessments of the situation and its consequences.
According to a major regional portal, Middle East Online, these assessments can be divided into two categories. One group tends to support the idea of Israel’s overwhelming superiority and its control over the region’s key institutions. They also believe the predictions of the Lebanese astrologer Layla Abdel Latif. The other group offers alternative scenarios, including those pointing to an Iranian victory and the collapse of the Trump-Netanyahu alliance.
Who is to blame for the war and how long it will last
Two main themes are of particular interest to commentators: who is responsible for this operation and how long will the confrontation between the two antagonistic sides last? One of the mediators, Omani Foreign Minister Badr bin Hamad Al-Busaidi, speaking on CBS television, revealed that Iran had accepted the zero enrichment condition and was ready to move its stockpiles outside its territory. However, this effort was in vain; Washington did not hear it.
It is clear that the adversaries’ balance of potential and military arsenals are disproportionate and favor the aggressors. Nevertheless, according to many experts, technological superiority does not guarantee a swift victory for the US. Trump left Tehran no chance for retreat, and Iran is acting in accordance with the logic of attrition, not traditional doctrine. Iran’s arsenal of ballistic missiles and drones, as well as the use of allies on Arab bridgeheads, allows it to open several fronts and turn the war against it into a costly and prolonged endeavor. Therefore, Tehran is betting on dragging things out until the military pressure becomes a political burden for its opponents.
Western intelligence services were too slow
Analyzing the situation, an Arab newspaper claims that Western intelligence services failed to properly assess Iran. Their attack plans were based on the assumption that “decapitating” the leadership would deprive Tehran of the will to launch retaliatory strikes. But events have shown that these intelligence agencies overlooked the quiet restoration of Iran’s potential, which began in 2025.
In addition, Iran’s opponents did not take into account the fact that, in Islamic tradition, the killing of a spiritual leader is often perceived not as his end, but as a transition to martyrdom. Usually such losses do not disorganize society but, on the contrary, mobilize it and give it strength.
Many analysts believe that Iran has demonstrated its ability to overcome this shock and recover institutional cohesion, having formed a temporary tripartite leadership including reformers, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, and the bureaucratic religious elite. Despite limited capabilities compared to the US, Iran retains significant regional influence. At the same time, some fear that an Iran weakened by the US and Israel could strategically destabilize the countries that rely on Tehran for security purposes.
Countries in the region reject US military involvement
This war was unleashed by Washington for the sake of Israel and for goals that are not accepted by the countries of the region, concludes the Arab As-Sabil newspaper. Washington ignored all calls, efforts, and negotiations aimed at preventing it. According to analysts, this places Arab states at the epicenter of pressure, requiring high political acumen in matters of national security demands in order to avoid being drawn into axes that could lead to a larger confrontation. America’s investment in its military assets has actually damaged regional stability and the interests of the countries of the region. Military assets, including bases and partnerships, have become nothing less than a curse for the countries in the region and a cause of undermining its security.
“Trump’s noble mission for the future” – rhetoric repeated at the White House – is nothing more than a grand gamble based on the assumption that overseas power is capable of changing history. This may provoke unforeseen reactions from other international powers, which perceive such behavior as a dangerous American unilateral approach to the demands and fate of global energy and logistics.
Not just a war, but a deep transformation
Regional analysts find that part of society is shocked as the predictions they hear in the evening are irrelevant by the morning, with multiple new scenarios spawning. Today a massive new war looms in the region. This war is not a traditional conflict between two sides, but rather a brief moment that will determine the region’s landscape for decades to come. An Arab author fears that it is not just a clash; it is a deep strategic transformation that is turning the region into a quagmire where blood, chaos, and miscalculation are constant.
Yuri Zinin, PhD in History, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of International Studies, Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University), Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
Follow new articles on our Telegram channel
The Horizon of the War. “Italy is being Dragged Into the War against Iran”
By Manlio Dinucci | Global Research | March 9, 2026
Contrary to what the Italian Government says, the United States does not need authorisation from the Italian Government or Italian Parliament regarding the use of its bases in Italy.
In fact, it has complete freedom to use them as it wishes.
By using Sigonella as an intelligence centre for the war against Iran, the United States is protecting itself, but is also dragging Italy into the war and exposing it to the risk of being targeted.
We refer our readers to this episode of Grandangolo, focusing the following notes on the key issue we are facing in Italy. Defence Minister Guido Crosetto himself, in his reply to the House of Commons, described the war that has broken out in the Middle East as follows:
“Of course it was outside the rules of international law. It is a war that started without the world’s knowledge and that we now find ourselves having to deal with. Our problem is to manage the consequences of a crisis that has erupted and that we did not want.” Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, in a radio programme, admitted that the war entails a “risk of escalation that could have unpredictable consequences”.
Meloni’s stance on US bases in Italy
Regarding the use of these bases, Meloni assured that “we are complying with the 1954 bilateral agreements”. She then clarified: “In Italy, we have three military bases granted to the Americans under agreements dating back to 1954, which have always been updated.” We therefore request that the Prime Minister show Parliament and the media the texts of the 1954 bilateral agreements between Italy and the United States, as well as any subsequent updates. This will not be easy, as these agreements are covered by military secrecy in their entirety. Regarding Meloni’s statement that “in Italy, we have three military bases granted to the Americans”, she should explain the following facts to Parliament and the media.
According to the official Pentagon Base Structure Report, the US Armed Forces own more than 1,500 buildings in Italy, with a total surface area of over 1 million square metres, and lease or have concessions for another 800 buildings, with a surface area of approximately 900,000 square metres. That’s a total of over 2,300 buildings with a surface area of approximately 2 million square metres, spread across some fifty sites. But this is only part of the US military presence in Italy. In addition to US military bases, there are NATO bases under US command and Italian bases available to US/NATO forces. It is estimated that there are over a hundred in total. The entire network of military bases in Italy is, directly or indirectly, under the command of the Pentagon. It falls within the “area of responsibility” of the United States European Command, headed by a US general who also holds the position of Supreme Allied Commander in Europe. In other words, the United States does not need any authorisation from the Italian government or Parliament to use this network of bases, but has complete freedom to use it whenever and however it wants.
With the US base in Sigonella, Italy is being dragged into the war against Iran
This is confirmed by the United States’ use of the Sigonella base in Sicily. The Naval Air Station (NAS) Sigonella, with a staff of about 7,000 military and civilian personnel, is the largest US and NATO naval and air base in the Mediterranean region. In addition to providing logistical support to the US Sixth Fleet, it is the launch base for covert military operations mainly, but not exclusively, in the Middle East and Africa. The NAS – according to the official presentation – “houses US and NATO aircraft of all types”. These include spy drones, capable of flying without refuelling for over 16,000 kilometres, which carry out missions from Sigonella to the Middle East, Africa, eastern Ukraine, the Black Sea and other areas. Drones armed with missiles and satellite-guided bombs also take off from Sigonella for targeted (always secret) attacks. The Naval Air Station Sigonella is complemented by the Italian base in Augusta, which supplies fuel and ammunition to US and NATO naval units, and by the port of Catania, which can accommodate up to nine warships. The Sigonella base is connected to the MUOS station in Niscemi (Caltanissetta): a very high frequency military satellite communications system consisting of four satellites and four ground stations: two in the United States, in Virginia and Hawaii, one in Australia and one in Sicily, each equipped with three large parabolic antennas 18 metres in diameter. This system allows the Pentagon to connect submarines and warships, fighter-bombers and drones, military vehicles and ground units to a single command and communications network while they are on the move anywhere in the world.
Italmilradar, a website specialised in tracking military flights, reports based on radar tracks: “In recent days, several US Navy MQ-4C Triton surveillance drones have been spotted flying to and from the Sigonella military airbase, operating over the Eastern Mediterranean and heading towards areas closer to the Persian Gulf. Normally, when Tritons are engaged in monitoring the Gulf region, they are deployed on the front line at bases in the United Arab Emirates, particularly in Abu Dhabi.
From there, the drones can conduct ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance) missions over the Strait of Hormuz, the Gulf of Oman and the Northern Arabian Sea.
Using the Tritons from Sigonella increases the distance from operational areas, but provides a safer and more politically stable launch base. By keeping the drones in Sicily, the US Navy can reduce the risk to its ISR infrastructure. Sigonella has long been a central hub for US and NATO intelligence operations in the Mediterranean.
In the current crisis, Sigonella appears to be playing an even more important role, serving as a rear but highly capable ISR platform in support of operations extending from the eastern Mediterranean to the Gulf. The meaning is clear: by using Sigonella as an intelligence centre for the war against Iran, the United States is keeping itself safe, but in fact dragging Italy into the war and exposing it to the risk of being hit.
This article was originally published in Italian on Grandangolo, Byoblu TV.
Manlio Dinucci, award-winning author, geopolitical analyst and geographer, Pisa, Italy. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
A Second Vietnam War? Hanoi Waits and Prepares
By José Niño | The Libertarian Institute | March 9, 2026
On the surface, everything between Vietnam and the United States looked better than it ever had. In September 2023, President Joe Biden and General Secretary Nguyễn Phú Trọng signed a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership, elevating relations to their highest diplomatic tier. American officials toasted prosperity. Vietnamese leaders smiled for cameras. The messaging suggested a new chapter in a relationship once defined by napalm and body counts.
Then, in early February 2026, a very different story emerged from behind the curtain. The 88 Project, a U.S.-based human rights organization focused on Vietnam, exposed a classified internal military document that shattered the diplomatic facade. The revelation was subsequently covered by AP News, The Diplomat, and Le Monde. Vietnam’s Foreign Ministry did not respond to requests for comment.
The document bore the formal designation 357/KH-BTL and carried the title “The 2nd U.S. Invasion Plan.” Signed by Vice Admiral Tran Thanh Nghiem and certified by Rear Admiral Vu Van Nam, it was issued by Vietnam’s Navy Command in August 2024, months before Donald Trump returned to office for his second term. Its contents painted a picture of a government that publicly embraced Washington while privately treating it as the gravest threat to its survival.
Vietnamese military planners described the United States in the document as a “belligerent” superpower with a pattern of “creating a pretext” to launch wars against nations that “deviate from its orbit.” The plan acknowledged that the present risk of armed conflict remained low, yet insisted that America’s aggressive nature demanded constant vigilance.
The operational scenarios imagined within the plan read like something from a Cold War thriller. Vietnamese planners envisioned a full-scale American assault involving two to three aircraft carrier strike groups, three to four Marine brigades, and amphibious landings along the country’s vast coastline. In the most alarming passage, the document speculated that if conventional methods failed, the United States “may use biochemical and tactical nuclear weapons.”
Vietnamese analysts traced what they saw as an escalating pattern across three administrations. They pointed to President Barack Obama’s pivot to Asia, Trump’s first term (described as inciting an arms race), and Biden’s institutionalization of the Indo-Pacific Strategy. All of it, according to Le Monde, was portrayed as Washington forging a united front against China.
Ben Swanton, co-director of The 88 Project and author of the analysis, emphasized that this thinking was not confined to one paranoid faction. “There’s a consensus here across the government and across different ministries,” he told AP News. “This isn’t just some kind of a fringe element or paranoid element within the party or within the government.”
Perhaps the most revealing element in the plan was how Vietnam’s military ranked its adversaries. According to The Vietnamese Magazine’s analysis, China occupied the position of a “Category 3” adversary. That meant Beijing was seen as a territorial rival that contested borders and maritime claims but did not threaten the Communist Party’s hold on power.
The United States occupied a far more dangerous position. American power was classified under “Category 1” and “Category 2” designations, meaning Washington represented an existential threat to the regime itself. In the eyes of Vietnamese military planners, China wanted territory. America wanted the party gone.
This distinction carried explosive implications. Nguyen Khac Giang of Singapore’s ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute, speaking about the Communist Party’s conservative and military-aligned faction, told AP News that the military had “never been too comfortable moving ahead with the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with the United States.” The tensions had already surfaced publicly in June 2024, when an army television report accused the American-linked Fulbright University of fomenting a “color revolution.” The Foreign Ministry defended the university, which American and Vietnamese officials had highlighted when the two countries upgraded ties, but the episode revealed how deep institutional suspicion ran.
The most dangerous element in the leaked plan was never the fantasy of aircraft carriers and nuclear weapons. It was the way the document conflated civil society with warfare. Vietnamese planners drew explicit parallels to Ukraine’s 2004 Orange Revolution and the Philippines’ 1986 Yellow Revolution, portraying the American promotion of freedom, democracy, and human rights as opening salvos designed to “undermine and ultimately dismantle Vietnam’s socialist political system.”
By branding activists, journalists, and pro-democracy reformers as foot soldiers in a CIA-directed Color Revolution, the Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) used this subversion as a pretext to justify a major domestic crackdown. Starting around 2020, the CPV mobilized all branches of government to “prevent the US and its allies from fomenting a color revolution in the country,” according to a report by Le Monde. Advocacy for religious freedom or labor rights became, in the party’s framing, acts of war.
None of this meant Vietnam was irrational, or even unusual. Military contingency planning for worst-case scenarios is standard practice everywhere. Even the leaked document itself acknowledged that war remained “low risk.” The United States maintains its own history of drafting invasion plans against allies, from “War Plan Red” for Canada in the 1930s to plans to seize Middle Eastern oil fields in 1973. The “Hague Invasion Act” of 2002, still active, authorizes the president to use military force to free U.S. personnel held by the International Criminal Court. Washington’s abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January 2026 only deepened Vietnamese fears that the pattern was accelerating.
Vietnam’s foreign policy framework reflected this pragmatic paranoia. Hanoi’s famous “Four Nos” defense policy, reaffirmed by Prime Minister Phạm Minh Chính in August 2023, pledged no participation in military alliances, no siding with one country against another, no foreign military bases on Vietnamese soil, and no use or threat of force in international relations. Under this doctrine, Vietnam maintained comprehensive strategic partnerships with the United States, China, and Russia simultaneously. The approach, often described as “bamboo diplomacy” after a metaphor coined by the late General Secretary Trọng, allowed Hanoi to bend with shifting geopolitical winds without breaking.
The history of the Vietnam War gave these calculations a visceral dimension. The conflict killed approximately 3.1 million Vietnamese people according to the government’s own 1995 estimates, including roughly two million civilians. The National Archives records 58,220 American military fatalities. That staggering asymmetry reflected the reality of a war fought entirely on Vietnamese soil with industrial-scale firepower. For Vietnamese military planners, the idea of a second American invasion was not a paranoid abstraction. It was a memory that shaped every calculation they made.
It doesn’t help that the United States has a long track record of intervening and destabilizing countries in all corners of the globe. Such a track record of U.S. perfidy is being considered by Vietnamese strategists. Washington will dismiss this document as the paranoia of aging generals. Hanoi will pretend it never existed. But somewhere between the diplomatic toasts and the classified war games, the truth sits undisturbed. Vietnam remembers what America did the first time. And with a track record of interventions stretching from Guatemala to Venezuela, the United States has given Hanoi every reason to believe it could happen again.
Ted Postol: Fraud of Missile Defence Exposed in Iran War
Glenn Diesen | March 8, 2026
MIT Professor and Pentagon advisor Ted Postol explains why the missile defence systems are failing in the war against Iran, and why the US and Israel will not win this war.
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/…
US Intelligence Community is Covering its Ass… What is Really Going On with the US War on Iran?
By Larry C. Johnson – SONAR21 – March 8, 2026
Let’s start with the big news from a US Intelligence Community leak to the Washington Post… John Hudson and Warren P. Strobel got the story:
A classified report by the National Intelligence Council found that even a large-scale assault on Iran launched by the United States would be unlikely to oust the Islamic republic’s entrenched military and clerical establishment, a sobering assessment as the Trump administration raises the specter of an extended military campaign that officials say has “only just begun.”
The findings, confirmed to The Washington Post by three people familiar with the report’s contents, raise doubts about President Donald Trump’s declared plan to “clean out” Iran’s leadership structure and install a ruler of his choosing.
The report, completed about a week before the United States and Israel initiated the war on Feb. 28, outlined succession scenarios stemming from either a narrowly tailored campaign against Iran’s leaders or a broader assault against its leadership and government institutions, the people familiar with its findings said. In both cases, the intelligence concluded that Iran’s clerical and military establishment would respond to the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei by following protocols designed to preserve continuity of power, these people said.
This means the war in Iran is not going well and the US IC is beginning the Washington game of, “Don’t blame me, I warned you not to do it.” I don’t know if Tulsi Gabbard authorized this leak, or if it came from senior analysts from the four principal agencies that were involved in writing this classified report — i.e., the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency, State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research, and the National Security Agency. It is important to understand that this report was produced by the National Intelligence Council, aka the NIC, and it is under the direct control of Tulsi Gabbard. In any event I see this as a clear signal from people involved in producing this report that they will not be the scapegoats when the Iran war turns into a debacle for Donald Trump.
I get dozens of emails a day from readers asking questions and offering commentary. I try to read and respond to all. Today I received a series of questions from one of my subscribers. Instead of responding to this person personally, I decided to save time and post for all to see. Hopefully this helps you plow thru the ton of propaganda being spewed by Trump and the Zionists.
1) I’ve read that Tehran is now being hit with gravity bombs. Does the US now have total air space control? What happened to S300-400 and super long range radar able to detect stealth aircraft?
The US does not have air supremacy. The US and Israeli planes are flying close to Iran’s western border and releasing primarily the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile aka JASSAMs, which have a range between 230 and 600 miles depending on the variant (AGM-158A JASSM (baseline): ~370 km [230 miles] and AGM-158B JASSM-ER (Extended Range): ~980 km [610 miles]). I don’t know how many, if any, S300-S400 are deployed in Iran. Iran has reportedly shot down 29 MQ9s and Hermes drones since 28 February, which represents a financial loss of $800 million.
2) What does it imply that Iran has apologized to its neighbors for attacking them?
That is a misreading of what the Iranian President said. Pezeshkian personally apologized to the neighboring countries (Gulf/Arab states) that had been affected by Iranian missile and drone strikes, saying something along the lines of: “I should apologize to the neighboring countries that were attacked by Iran, on my own behalf and on behalf of Iran.” However, Pezeshkian in later remarks emphasized that any de-escalation gesture was undermined by US actions (like Trump’s response framing it as capitulation). As long as the US continues to conduct military operations from the territories of the Gulf/Arab states Iran will (and has) continue to attack the US targets in those countries.
3) What are the targets of the new cluster bomb rockets? Airfields?
The most recent video evidence shows Iran has hit Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv, the oil refinery in Haifa. The clusters from the Iranian rocket are hitting ground targets in Tel Aviv and Haifa at a minimum.
4) Why can’t Iran stop the constant barrage they are undergoing? They seem as defenseless as Gaza.
Iran does not have a perfect air defense system. Worth noting that despite Donald Trump’s threats, the number of US AGM strikes in Iran have declined by 80%. According to Simplicius :
US’s strikes have likewise fallen off from nearly 1,000 on the first day to an estimated 200-300 per day or less since then—and many if not most of those strikes are hitting superficial targets to “fluff up the score”, like a plane boneyard which surely added a couple dozen “points” to the “impressive” strike list
5) Is the Iranian Air Force destroyed?
No. The strikes on Iranian combat planes have been largely confined to the Western part of Iran. They still have ample capability in the East. Iran maintains 17 Tactical Fighter Bases (TFBs), and in recent years several new airfields have been constructed in central and eastern Iran, with at least two becoming permanent TFBs — the first established since 1979. One known eastern base is TFB.14 near Mashhad, in the far northeast. To protect assets from preemptive strikes, Iran has moved much of its air power underground. The “Eagle 44” (Oghab 44) airbase, unveiled in 2023, is a massive facility carved into the Zagros Mountains, designed to withstand bunker-buster bombs and housing fighter jets, drones, and command facilities. As of February 28, 2026, reports indicate MiG-29s flying over Tehran and Su-24 strike aircraft being repositioned, suggesting active defensive preparations.
6) Is it hard to put airfields out of service? For example send all fuel tanks up in flames. The conclusion I reach is that it requires high precision missiles and Iran doesn’t have enough of those types to expend them on that type of target. Meanwhile Tehran burns and some US radars are gone.
Blowing up fuel tanks can create a fuel shortage, but it does not disable airfields. Cratering an airfield and putting it permanently out of commission is difficult because the runways can be repaired. You need to stop listening to the US propaganda claims about massive destruction. And how do you know how many high precision missiles Iran has? I don’t know, but what I continue to see is that Iran is firing several waves of precision missile attacks into Tel Aviv and Haifa as well as US bases/ installations throughout the Persian Gulf.
7) The fact that US has been blinded by radar loss hasn’t seemed to help Iran much. Newer Iranian missiles are getting through but that would have been true regardless of those radar stations status.
You answer your own question. Yes, the US loss of the advance radar systems has blinded it and, as a consequence, Iranian missiles are getting through. So what is your real question?
I had an excellent conversation about the current state of the war on Iran with Mario Nawfal this afternoon:
Andrei Martyanov and I spent an hour on Friday afternoon with Randy Credico on his show, Live on the Fly:
Step into My Parlor
By William Schryver | March 7, 2026
The dominant narrative in relation to the Iran War is that the United States and Israel are mercilessly mauling the Iranians, and are on the verge of administering the coup de grâce, after which Iran will obeisantly submit to unconditional surrender, and bathe Emperor Trump’s feet with their penitent tears.
At least that’s the Hollywood version of the tale.
Here in the real world, American stockpiles of long-range stand-off strike munitions (Tomahawk: ~900 nautical miles; JASSM: ~600 nautical miles) have reached a critical stage.
In the case of the US, it is almost certain that usable Tomahawk inventory is now no more than ~2500, perhaps as few as ~2000 when you consider how many “duds” there have been in recent years.
They may have ~3000 JASSM left.
So, about ~5000 subsonic cruise missiles to finish off the job of subduing Iran, and still have enough to fight elsewhere if the need arises.
But it’s already not even remotely enough to go up against Russia or China. They would be gone in a matter of days.
It’s a pitiful state of affairs for the erstwhile “Greatest Military in Human History”.
In any case, given the severely depleted stockpiles of American long-range cruise missiles, we have arrived at a very important juncture in this war.
In order to defeat Iran without compromising its already tenuous ability to face Russia and/or China, the US will have to start using glide bombs instead of its precious stand-off missiles.
The problem with that, of course, is that dropping JDAM glide bombs requires the launching of aircraft to get within ~40 nmi.
That is well within the “Danger Zone” of Iranian air defenses.
Of course, most people believe Iranian air defenses have been completely eradicated; that US and Israeli aircraft are now flying over Iran unopposed.
Total air supremacy.
I am not nearly so sanguine when it comes to this question.
Sure, when this war started back up in earnest almost a week ago, Iran didn’t have sufficient breadth and depth of integrated air defenses to defend comprehensively against Tomahawk, JASSM, or the relative handful of Sparrow ALBMs Israel has.
So they decided to defend a few very important sites as best they could, but otherwise accept the reality that other targets were going to get hit — at least until the inherent limitations of the strained US stockpiles began to assert their inexorable logic.
What I believe the Iranians have done is to judiciously husband their air defense systems in anticipation of the day when the US and Israel would be compelled to venture into range in order to drop glide bombs.
That day is either already here, or is very soon approaching.
Missiles and bombs are a challenge to shoot down, but aircraft are not. They are all exceedingly vulnerable, including the B-2, F-22, and F-35.
If the US flies “stealth” aircraft into Iran to drop short-range munitions, I fully expect some will get shot down, including the devoutly venerated B-2.
And if the US flies “non-stealth” aircraft into Iran to drop short-range munitions, I fully expect several to get shot down.
Then we’ll have a serious crisis on our hands.

