US-Israeli war of aggression on Iran meant to reshape region: Omani FM
Press TV – March 12, 2026
Oman’s Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi says that the United States and Israel launched an all-out coordinated aggression against Iran to block the Palestinian statehood and reshape the West Asia region.
Albusaidi said on Thursday that the “real objective of the war” is to “weaken Iran, reshape the region, and push the normalization agenda,” including efforts “to prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state.”
The top Omani diplomat warned that the ongoing US and Israeli attacks on Iran are part of a “dangerous chain of violations.”
The war on Iran has undermined the legal framework that has provided regional stability for decades, he added.
Albusaidi also pointed out that Iran is not the only target of the ongoing aggression.
“There is a broader plan targeting the region, and Iran is not the only target. Many regional actors are aware of this, but they are betting that aligning with the United States may push it to revise its decisions and policies,” he said.
In recent months, the Tel Aviv regime has displayed its ill intention by releasing maps which show several areas of Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Iraq as part of “Greater Israel,” a vicious Zionist project, widely supported by the administration of US President Donald Trump.
The Israeli regime’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu and members of his extremist cabinet have already announced a plan to annex the occupied West Bank in order to steal more Palestinian land and block the possibility of a Palestinian statehood.
Albusaidi also warned the war could drive higher oil prices and major supply chain disruptions globally.
The US-Israeli aggression has already driven the oil and gas prices much higher and caused food inflation.
Oman is seeking to stop the war and return to diplomacy, he stressed.
Albusaidi said the war may end soon, but called for reconsidering Persian Gulf security strategies and preparing for worst-case scenarios.
The US and Israel attacked Iran on February 28 in an unprovoked act of aggression, targeting sites across Iran, including schools, hospitals, and sports halls.
Iran responded by launching missiles and drones at targets inside Israel as well as at American bases across the region.
Senior Iranian officials have asserted that any deliberate assault by the United States and Israeli regime on Iran’s civilian and cultural heritage sites constitutes a “flagrant breach of international humanitarian law and an undisputed war crime.”
Elsewhere in his remarks on Thursday, the Omani foreign minister said Oman will not join Trump’s so-called “Board of Peace” and will not normalize relations with Israel.
The remarks come as Trump keeps pushing more Arab states of the Persian Gulf region to join the Abraham Accords and normalize their ties with Israel despite the regime’s brutal more than to-year long Israeli assault against Palestinians in Gaza.
Iran Does Not Consider Israel Party to Talks to Need Mediators With It – Ambassador
Sputnik – 12.03.2026
Iran does not need mediators with Israel because it does not consider it a party to negotiations, Iranian Ambassador to Moscow Kazem Jalali told Sputnik in an interview.
“Iran does not officially recognize the Zionist regime as a party with which to negotiate. To date, there have been no cases of mediation or similar measures. In the recent series of events, Iran has responded on the battlefield and is not seeking mediation or any similar steps,” Jalali said when asked whether Iran attempted to establish contact with Israeli authorities through Russia.
He also recalled that Israel had told the Russian leadership that it had no intention of attacking Iran, but Tehran, he said, knew that such assurances were untrue.
On February 28, the United States and Israel launched strikes on targets in Iran, including in Tehran, causing damage and civilian casualties. Iran responded by striking Israeli territory and US military facilities in the Middle East.
The US and Israel initially claimed their “preemptive” attack was necessary to counter the perceived threat coming from Iran’s nuclear program, but they soon made it clear that they want to see a change of power in Iran.
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed on the first day of the military operation. The Islamic Republic declared 40 days of mourning.
Russian President Vladimir Putin described Khamenei’s assassination as a cynical violation of international law. The Russian Foreign Ministry condemned the US-Israeli operation and called for an immediate deescalation and an end to hostilities.
Macron’s aircraft carrier and warplanes to the Persian Gulf is a dangerous vanity project
By Finian Cunningham | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 12, 2026
Like a knight in shining armour, French President Emmanuel Macron is vowing to defend Europe’s interests as the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran escalates.
Macron is not defending Europe or French honor. His theatrical swashbuckling is going to get more people killed and very possibly make the economic impact on Europe even more disastrous.
On a visit to Cyprus this week, Macron declared that a strike on Cyprus was a strike on Europe. He was referring to drone attacks on a British air base on the Mediterranean island last week that were blamed on Iran. It’s not clear who fired the drones at a time when false-flag operations are suspected in Turkey and Azerbaijan, carried out by Israeli forces seeking to embroil the region.
The French president was also filmed inspecting troops on board the Charles de Gaulle, France’s sole aircraft carrier, which he said is being sent along with 12 other warships to the Strait of Hormuz. The aircraft carrier was abruptly redirected from NATO exercises in the Atlantic to the Mediterranean.
The Strait of Hormuz has been closed to oil tankers since the U.S. and Israel launched their aggression on Iran two weeks ago. Europe is particularly vulnerable to oil price shocks and diminishing supply since the EU cut itself off from Russian energy markets over the proxy war in Ukraine.
In addition to the French armada being dispatched to the Persian Gulf, Macron has also ordered Rafale fighter jets to “defend the skies” over the United Arab Emirates, where the French have a base.
However, Macron’s latest show of bravado has telltale question marks. He emphasized that the French naval mission and its air assets were “purely defensive.” This indicates a lack of resolve, and that Paris is worried about the political backlash among French voters if it is seen to be wading into a reckless war started by the unhinged Americans and Israelis.
Also, Macron will be concerned that Iran views any involvement by European states as a party to the aggression and will likewise be targeted. That’s why Macron was trying to make out that French warships would be only “escorting tankers” to ensure passage through the Strait of Hormuz. The subtext to Iran is, please don’t hit us.
But Iran has categorically stated that as long as the U.S. and Israel’s aggression continues, then not one drop of oil will pass out of the Persian Gulf. If French warships try to enter the Gulf even as escort vessels, they will be seen as trying to break Iran’s tactical blockade. That will make them legitimate targets for Iran.
Macron qualified his armada plan as happening when the conflict subsides. That hardly sounds like a forthright act of bravery, more like hedging your bets.
What the French leader is doing is engaging in a vanity contest. Notably, the British Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, has been ridiculed by Donald Trump as “not being Winston Churchill” over his dithering to send military support. The British press has noted that Macron was trolling British weakness and “rubbing our noses in it”. The visit to Cyprus – which still has colonial links with London – was aimed at showing up the British as ineffective, unlike the chivalrous French coming to the rescue.
Macron is also attempting to sideline Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who was in the White House last week, sucking up to Trump by avowing Berlin’s support against Iran. There has been a long-running ill feeling in Paris that Germany is becoming too big for its boots militarily. Macron is endeavoring to don the mantle of European leadership by declaring the defense of interests in the Persian Gulf.
The blunt truth is that Europe and France in particular are a non-entity. The EU is a mess because it has been a pathetic vassal to the United States, cutting itself off from Russian energy and damaging its economies. Now that oil is being cut off from the Persian Gulf and oil prices are heading above $100 per barrel, the Europeans are hit with a double whammy – all because of their subservience to Washington.
Macron’s strutting around the Charles de Gaulle to the strains of the Marseillaise is just theatrics to contrive looking as if he is doing something.
Another vanity factor is the major loss of the French warplane deal with Colombia last week.
For years, the French have been bidding for the sale of their Rafale fighter jets to the South American country. At the last minute, Colombia canceled the purchase and opted instead for Swedish Gripen jets. The loss is huge, amounting to €3 billion for French revenue and thousands of manufacturing jobs. But even more than that, the knock-on effect is a serious setback to French ambitions to crack the strategic Latin American market.
As soon as the news of the Colombia setback was announced, Macron took to nationwide television with his plans to send the Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier and its squadron of Rafale jets.
This is Macron compensating for being jilted by Colombia and the potential damage to France’s military reputation and future sales of its Rafale. He is using the Persian Gulf as an advertising platform for the French military.
The mobilizing of French sea and air assets is less about “defending” Europe and more about boosting national ego and Macron’s self-image as a reincarnation of Napoleon or De Gaulle.
Macron’s folly could see him getting France and Europe dragged into a disastrous war instigated by Trump and the genocidal Israeli regime.
Iran has warned that France or any other European involvement in the war will not be viewed as neutral. France, Britain, and Germany have fanned this war by their duplicity and pandering to the United States and Israel. Macron’s vanity is an added dangerous factor for escalating the conflict and the catastrophic impact on the global economy.
If Macron and the Europeans had any moral fibre, they should be condemning the U.S. and Israeli aggression against Iran, not exploiting it for self-aggrandizement.
US failures in Iran reveal Russia is key to South Korea’s strategic security
By Drago Bosnic | March 11, 2026
You’re probably wondering what Russia, South Korea, Iran and the United States could possibly have in common. Moscow has very close ties with Pyongyang, not Seoul, while Tehran is simply too far to be of any consequence to South Korean strategic security. Or is it? The failures of American ABM (anti-ballistic missile) systems in the Middle East demonstrate that the US is simply unable to wage simultaneous wars against remotely capable opponents. Namely, the Pentagon is frantically trying to replenish its stockpile of ABM munitions after billions of dollars’ worth of interceptors were wasted trying to shoot down Iranian ballistic missiles, most of which are still 60-year-old Soviet-era technology.
However, the US needs to at least try to protect whatever’s left of its military infrastructure in the Middle East. The only way to achieve this is to transfer critically important ABM systems from other hotspots and redeploy them to the Persian Gulf region. This has already sounded the alarm in Kiev, where the Neo-Nazi junta is whining that they’re being left out. However, South Korea is also raising similar concerns after Washington DC decided to transfer “Patriot” ABM/SAM (surface-to-air missile) systems from the divided peninsula to the Middle East. On March 10, President Lee Jae Myung openly criticized this plan, but admitted it would be unrealistic to expect the US to take Seoul’s concerns seriously.
“The USFK [United States Forces Korea] may dispatch some air defense systems abroad in accordance with its own military needs. While we have expressed opposition, the reality is that we cannot fully push through our position,” he stated.
Local sources report that several “Patriot” batteries have already been withdrawn from Osan Air Base, located in the city of Pyeongtaek, approximately 65 km south of Seoul (although homonymous with the city of Osan City, the airbase is actually about 7-8 km further south). There are reports that the SAM/ABM systems are heading to American bases in Saudi Arabia and/or the UAE. Although we’re yet to see an official confirmation from South Korea, President Lee’s vocal objections serve as de facto evidence to that effect. Many (if not most) local media outlets are far less ambivalent and see the US as the main culprit, blaming its abortive aggression on Iran for the current situation.
Faced with chronic shortages of its grossly overhyped and exorbitantly overpriced air and missile defense systems (and munitions), Washington DC is now forced to redirect them from other hotspots, including NATO-occupied Ukraine, where the Kiev regime is desperately trying to boost the “PR victories” of Western weapon systems. However, while the Neo-Nazi junta is worrying only about the “Patriot”, the Pentagon actually uses more advanced systems, such as the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), which is deployed in both Asia-Pacific and the Middle East. Still, currently deployed THAAD systems are nowhere near enough to cover the critical areas where US occupation forces are stationed.
On March 9, citing two US War Department officials, The Washington Post reported that the Pentagon used around $5.6 billion worth of munitions in just two days of America’s aggression on Iran. With various types of advanced weapon systems and stockpiles depleted, Washington DC was forced to redeploy numerous assets from elsewhere to continue the war. Interestingly, the US still insists that it has “enough munitions” and that the transfer is “only a precaution” and a series of “preventive steps in anticipation of the Iran crisis potentially prolonging”. This is yet another confirmation that things aren’t exactly going as planned by the unadulterated warmongers and war criminals at the Pentagon.
However, various other sources confirm that this is also done to replace assets destroyed during Iran’s retaliation. Namely, according toForeign Policy, it will take 5-8 years to rebuild the radar systems used by the “Patriot” and THAAD in Qatar, while another one destroyed in Bahrain will take up to 2 years to be replaced. The mainstream propaganda machine regularly resorts to damage control in order to hide American losses in manpower and military infrastructure, but the actual figures now hover at around $5-6 billion in destroyed equipment (although it could easily be far worse) and potentially hundreds of KIA/WIA (killed/wounded in action). However, once again, how does this relate to Russia and South Korea?
Well, Seoul foolishly sided with Washington DC, cutting its relatively cordial ties with Moscow. Worse yet, a massive stockpile of South Korean weapons was indirectly supplied to the Kiev regime through the US, helping prolong the NATO-orchestrated Ukrainian conflict. Thus, Russia and North Korea ended their efforts to stabilize the situation on the peninsula through close contacts with South Korea and concluded their own military pact that includes a mutual defense clause. Thus, by being a good vassal to Washington DC, Seoul gained nothing, but lost a unique opportunity to reconcile with Pyongyang through Moscow’s mediation. This has effectively closed the Kremlin’s door to South Korea for years (if not decades) to come.
However, it didn’t have to be like this. Until just 10-15 years ago, their relations were far better, including close defense ties. Namely, Seoul was always dissatisfied with the grossly overhyped and exorbitantly overpriced US-made “Patriot” system, so it looked for alternatives. Back in the early 2000s, it turned to Russia for technology transfers in advanced air defenses. South Korea invited Russian defense industry enterprises, specifically Almaz-Antey and Fakel, to directly participate in the development of a new indigenous air defense system that would replace the troubled “Patriot”. Moscow used its extensive experience in advanced SAM systems to not only speed up R&D, but also deliver a far superior product.
Russian companies combined the components of the export versions of the S-350 “Vityaz” and the S-400 “Triumf”, specifically the 9M96 missile and the 92N6E multipurpose radar, greatly augmenting and vastly enhancing the original South Korean design. This includes a vertical, cold-launch system, far superior to the “Patriot’s” angled approach, in which the missile ignites while in the canister. The Russian method provides 360° coverage, while the “Patriot” is limited to 120° sectors, requiring multiple launch platforms to cover the same area. Thus, thanks to the Kremlin, the (K)M-SAM was born, offering far superior performance for a fraction of the cost, while also being much better optimized and automated.
For instance, the system’s 9M96-derived interceptor costs $1.1 million, nearly seven times less than the “Patriot’s” XM400 (better known as the PAC-3 MSE). Thus, the only air and missile defense systems that South Korea can now rely on are those developed by Russia, because the (neo)colonial master in Washington DC has other priorities. Worse yet, back in late 2024, with the tacit backing of the US, the now-disgraced South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol and his Defense Minister Kim Yong-hyun nearly caused a war with nuclear-armed North Korea by launching attack drones on Pyongyang. In other words, if Seoul wants to ensure its strategic security, it urgently needs to restart dialogue with Russia and North Korea instead of remaining a US vassal.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst.
‘All ports in Persian Gulf will be legitimate targets if Iranian ports are attacked’
Press TV – March 11, 2026
The senior spokesman of Iran’s armed forces has warned that all ports and economic centers in Persian Gulf littoral states will be considered legitimate targets for Iran if the United States attacks Iranian ports as part of the ongoing joint aggression with Israel against the country.
“If the US follows through with its threat against Iran’s ports, there will definitely be no port, economic center, or location in the Persian Gulf that could remain beyond our reach, and they will be struck as legitimate targets,” Brigadier General Abolfazl Shekarchi said on Wednesday.
Shekarchi said that Iran has exercised restraint since the start of the US-Israeli aggression in late February by limiting its attacks to US military bases and assets in the region.
However, the general warned that attacks will expand to cover all locations in Persian Gulf countries if the US attacks key infrastructure in southern Iran.
The warning comes in response to US threats of attacking Iranian oil production facilities, as Washington faces growing pressure over rising international energy and commodity prices caused by the escalating conflict in the Persian Gulf.
Prices have increased steadily since earlier this week when Iran intensified its restrictions on the passage of ships through the Strait of Hormuz, a key waterway in the Persian Gulf responsible for a fifth of global oil demand.
Shekarchi rejected claims by the US military that its operations had caused Iranian naval vessels to be trapped in docks and economic ports in southern Iran.
“We consider this news one hundred percent wrong, and it is a lie… The (Iranian) armed forces are standing powerfully, and if necessary, we will carry out operations heavier than those we have carried out so far,” he told state TV.
American bases do not protect – they attack the peoples of the Persian Gulf
By Eduardo Vasco | Strategic Culture Foundation | March 11, 2026
“Our success will continue to hinge on America’s military power and the credibility of our assurances to our allies and partners in the Middle East.”
These were the words spoken in December 2013 by the Secretary of Defense of the Obama administration, Chuck Hagel, to the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council. That reinforced the historical guarantees given by Washington to its puppets, reaffirming the deceptive propaganda that the United States is the guardian of global security.
Promises like that are made by every administration, whether Democrat or Republican. Twelve years later, Donald Trump would reinforce that mantra again, addressing Qatar specifically: “The United States shall regard any armed attack on the territory (…) of Qatar as a threat to the peace and security of the United States.” According to Trump, the United States would respond to attacks against Qatar with “all lawful and appropriate measures,” “including militarily.”
Israel had just bombed Doha, targeting Hamas leaders. The entire speech by the president of the United States was completely hollow: the Patriot systems acquired for 10 billion dollars in the 2012 agreement, together with a new acquisition of Patriot and NASAMS systems for more than 2 billion dollars in 2019, did not intercept the Israeli bombardment. And the United States did not consider that attack a “threat to the peace and security of the United States” — on the contrary, they turned a blind eye to it.
Qatar hosts the U.S. Central Command, the U.S. Air Force and the British Royal Air Force at Al-Udeid Air Base, built with more than 8 billion dollars invested by the Qatari government. None of this has protected the Qatari people. Iran’s retaliation for the U.S.–Israel aggression revealed that the base itself (the largest U.S. military installation in the Middle East) is a fragile target: it was struck by a missile on the 3rd, which likely damaged or destroyed the AN/FPS-132 early-warning radar, one of the most important sensors in the U.S. missile defense system, valued at about $1.1 billion. Satellite images suggest significant damage to the equipment, which could compromise the ability to detect ballistic missiles at long distances.
In 2017, Saudi Arabia spent $110 billion on U.S. military equipment in an agreement that foresees spending more than $350 billion by next year — including Patriot and THAAD systems. Apparently, this enormous expenditure is not guaranteeing fully secure protection. Despite important interceptions in the current war, the U.S. government instructed part of its personnel to flee Saudi Arabia to protect themselves — which reveals that even the United States does not trust the defensive capability it sells to others. In fact, in the early hours of the 3rd, two drones struck the U.S. embassy in Riyadh and, two days earlier, U.S. soldiers were also targeted.
Since 1990, Gulf countries have spent nearly $500 billion purchasing weapons and protection systems from the United States, according to data from the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) database and reports from the Congressional Research Service (CRS). The construction and maintenance of defense infrastructure by the United States is almost entirely financed by the host countries. All of this is being blown apart by the legitimate Iranian retaliation.
The ineffectiveness of the protection provided by the United States had already been demonstrated in last year’s war, but also by the launches from Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis toward Israel, which shattered the myth surrounding the Iron Dome. In a certain sense, the success of many of those attacks represented a humiliation for the all-powerful American arms industry. The several MQ-9 Reaper drones shot down by the Yemenis represented losses amounting to $200 million — the drones used by the Houthis to shoot down the American aircraft cost an insignificant fraction to produce.
The ineffectiveness of American protection also reveals the extremely low quality of the products of its military complex. This complex is dominated by a small handful of monopolies such as Lockheed Martin and Raytheon which, without competitors and with clients subservient to the American government, see no need to make the maximum effort to produce weapons and systems of unsurpassable quality. Finally, corruption runs rampant in this field, and inferior peoples such as those of the Gulf do not deserve to consume products of the same quality as those destined for America — apparently their regimes are willing to pay dearly for anything.
Iran, with all its experience of more than four decades dealing with aggression, has known how to use these vulnerabilities very well. Leaders at the highest levels of the Iranian state publicly insist that peace in the Middle East is impossible while U.S. bases remain operational in the region. Saeed Khatibzadeh, Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister, stated, “We have no option but to put an end to the existence of American presence in the Persian Gulf area.” These appeals are certainly circulating in neighboring countries — both among the general population and within the armed and political forces.
The Persian nation is not only attacking military installations but also strategic targets that affect the nerve center of the Gulf countries’ economies: the energy industry — in retaliation for the bombings of its own oil infrastructure by the United States and Israel. These Iranian attacks place even greater pressure on the puppet regimes of imperialism to do something to stop their masters. The obvious solution would be to prevent the use of their territory for aggression against Iran, which would necessarily imply closing the military bases.
Although all these countries are dictatorships that repress any dissent, as the suffering of the civilian population increases, popular discontent may become uncontrollable. Their rulers know this and are already racking their brains to find a safe way out of this potentially explosive situation.
Will the peoples of these countries swallow all the lying propaganda that their regimes — fed by the lie industry of the United States and Israel — try to tell them, that Iran is the aggressor and responsible for the attacks? But why do the United States build missile launch bases so close to residential neighborhoods? Clearly, just like the Israelis, this is not a “moral” and “ethical” army: those people exist to serve as human shields for American soldiers. The logic of protection is inverted: it is not U.S. anti-aircraft systems that serve to protect the Saudi, Emirati or Qatari people — it is these second-class citizens who must die to protect the occupying forces.
Moreover, U.S. military bases frequently house soldiers responsible for crimes against local populations. This became explicit during the Iraq War. For example, the rape of a 14-year-old girl named Abeer Qassim Hamza al-Janabi, followed by her murder and the killing of her family after soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division invaded her house in Mahmudiya in 2004. Or the rapes documented over years during the invasion of Iraq, together with the practice of sexual exploitation and prostitution carried out in areas near American military installations such as Balad Air Base, used by the 4th Infantry Division.
On the 1st, U.S. Marines killed at least nine protesters who attempted to storm the American consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, in protest against the criminal aggression against Iran that had already massacred about 150 girls in an Iranian school the previous day. This is what imperialist presence in the countries of the Middle East, Central Asia, Africa and Latin America serves for: to rape, murder and use the natives themselves as human shields, not to protect them.
How long will it take before they rise up against this true military occupation? Probably not long.
Syrian president vows ‘absolute support’ to disarm Hezbollah
The Cradle | March 11, 2026
Lebanese President Joseph Aoun received a phone call on 10 March from his Syrian counterpart, ex-Al-Qaeda chief Ahmad al-Sharaa, who expressed his support for Beirut’s efforts in disarming Hezbollah.
The Lebanese Presidency said Aoun and Sharaa discussed regional developments and stressed that “the current delicate situation requires activating coordination and consultation between the two countries, especially with regard to the need to control the borders and prevent any security breaches from any side.”
The Syrian Presidency also released its own statement on the call with Aoun. “President Sharaa expressed his explicit and absolute support for the efforts led by President Joseph Aoun to disarm ‘Hezbollah.’ He affirmed that this step is essential for solidifying Lebanese state sovereignty and shielding the region from the repercussions of ongoing regional armed conflicts,” the statement said.
It also called for “joint action” between Lebanon and Syria, “to ensure the safety of the Syrian and Lebanese peoples and to protect the gains of stability achieved recently.”
The phone call comes hours after Damascus claimed that it came under attack by Hezbollah on the Syrian–Lebanese border.
The Syrian army said “Hezbollah militias” fired shells toward its positions near Serghaya, adding that reinforcements from the Lebanese resistance group had been observed arriving along the Syrian–Lebanese border.
Syrian officials said they were monitoring the situation, coordinating with the Lebanese army, and studying possible responses, warning that the Syrian army “will not tolerate any attack targeting Syria.”
Hezbollah, which is busy fighting an Israeli invasion in the south, has not released any statements commenting on the matter.
The Lebanese resistance fought in Syria for years alongside the former government, and took part in the recapture of several parts of the country from groups including Al-Qaeda’s Nusra Front, Ahrar al-Sham, and other extremist organizations who were at the time considered the Syrian opposition.
The Nusra Front was later rebranded into Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the group that toppled former Syrian president Bashar al-Assad’s government in 2024 and now dominates Syria’s Defense Ministry.
Nusra occupied large swathes of the northern and eastern Lebanese border region for years at the start of the Syrian war, and was eventually expelled by Hezbollah and the Lebanese army.
Clashes broke out between the Lebanese army and Syrian troops earlier this year, after Damascus’s forces advanced against the border under the pretext of dealing with smuggling.
Heavy clashes also erupted between the Syrian army and Lebanese tribes on the border in 2025. Damascus falsely claimed at the time that it was fighting Hezbollah.
Since the start of the war in Iran and the entry of Hezbollah into the conflict, the Syrian military has been building up its presence along the Lebanese border, claiming the measures are aimed at “combating smuggling.”
The new authorities in Damascus have allied themselves with Washington. Damascus has been working, at the request of the US, to prevent any Hezbollah-bound weapons from entering Lebanon.
It has also been cracking down on Palestinian resistance factions.
US envoy Tom Barrack threatened Lebanon last year with a Syrian incursion, and said Damascus would “actively assist us in confronting and dismantling the remnants of ISIS, the IRGC [Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps], Hamas, Hezbollah, and other terrorist networks.”
Emirati billionaire rebukes US senator over call for Gulf states to join war with Iran
MEMO | March 10, 2026
Emirati billionaire Khalaf Al Habtoor has sharply criticised US Senator Lindsey Graham after the American lawmaker called on Gulf states to join military operations against Iran alongside the United States and Israel.
In a lengthy post on the social media platform X, Al Habtoor rejected any Gulf participation in the conflict, arguing that the region is already paying the price for decisions taken without consulting Arab states.
Graham made the remarks during media interviews following a closed congressional briefing, where he urged Gulf countries to become more actively involved in military action against Iran. He argued that Iranian attacks on countries such as Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia could prompt Washington’s Arab allies to take a stronger role in the confrontation.
The senator also said that the United States “will not fight alone in the Middle East”, noting that arms sales to Gulf countries form part of broader strategic alliances.
Al Habtoor responded by criticising what he described as foreign pressure on regional states to join the conflict.
“We know perfectly well why we are being attacked, and we also know who dragged the entire region into this dangerous escalation without consulting its allies,” he wrote.
The Emirati businessman said Gulf countries do not need outside protection and warned against risking the lives of people in the region in a wider war.
“Nothing is more precious than the lives of our sons, and no alliance is worth risking them,” he said, adding: “We don’t need your protection… all we want from you is to keep your hands off us.”
Al Habtoor also criticised the role of the global arms trade, describing weapons sales as a major business rather than a form of protection, and argued that conflicts in the region benefit the international arms industry.
He further accused Graham of prioritising Israeli interests over those of the American public, saying the region’s countries seek peace and stability and prefer diplomatic solutions rather than military escalation.
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.
Aramco CEO warns ‘catastrophe’ imminent if Strait of Hormuz remains shut
The Cradle | March 10, 2026
Saudi oil giant Aramco issued a warning on 10 March that the global energy market faces “catastrophic consequences” if the Strait of Hormuz remains closed.
“There would be catastrophic consequences for the world’s oil markets and the longer the disruption goes on … the more drastic the consequences for the global economy,” Aramco CEO Amin Nasser told reporters.
“While we have faced disruptions in the past, this one by far is the biggest crisis the region’s oil and gas industry has faced,” he added.
Nasser went on to say that the crisis has ravaged the shipping and insurance sectors, while also threatening aviation, agriculture, and other industries.
“Of course, we would support any actions or measures that would help to deliver our products to our customers, to the global market,” he said when asked about the US Navy potentially escorting oil tankers through the strait.
Yet a top energy official in the Gulf told Reuters that ending the war was the only way to open the strait, through which around 20 to 30 percent of the world’s energy passed before the attack on Iran.
Qatar warned on Tuesday that attacks on regional energy infrastructure could trigger economic repercussions far beyond the Gulf.
Doha said strikes on oil and gas facilities have set a dangerous precedent.
Tehran has vowed not to allow “one liter of oil” to be shipped from the region if Washington and Tel Aviv’s war continues.
“The Strait of Hormuz will either be an outlet for understanding and cooperation, or it will turn into a strait of strangulation for those who dream of wars,” Ali Larijani, head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said.
Since the start of the war, Iran has targeted tankers refusing its warnings not to approach the strait.
US military bases housing key radars, as well as vital energy infrastructure across the Gulf, have also been struck by Iranian forces.
In response to an Israeli attack on an oil facility in Iran, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) said on 10 March that it targeted Israeli energy facilities in Haifa.
Global oil prices currently hover around $90 per barrel, down from $120 on Monday, following Trump’s statement that he aims for a swift resolution to the war.
However, prices are expected to surge again. Trump’s comments on the war have been contradictory. “We could go further, and we’re going to go further,” he said on Monday, before telling US media hours later that “I think the war is very complete, pretty much.”
The US military has burned through more than $10 billion of its annual budget since the start of the war in late February.
Trump’s advisors have been urging the US president to find an “exit plan” to “extract” Washington from the brutal war on Iran due to concerns of political backlash, informed sources told the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) on 9 March.
Yet Iran has reportedly refused ceasefire discussions. “It is we who will determine the end of the war,” the IRGC said this week.
What If Iran Says No?
Is an end to fighting currently possible?
Ashes of Pompeii | March 10, 2026
Rumors persist that the Trump administration is actively seeking an off-ramp to the escalating conflict with Iran. The prevailing assumption within certain circles of the White House is that Tehran, having sustained serious damage from recent military strikes, would welcome a cessation of hostilities. This calculation, however, rests on a dangerous misreading of Iranian resolve, historical grievance, and strategic necessity. What if Iran says no?
The first and most fundamental obstacle is trust. Can Iran reasonably trust any promise made by Donald Trump? The historical record suggests otherwise. The unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018, despite verified Iranian compliance, established a precedent of bad faith. Yet, the breach of trust goes deeper than past policy. The February 28 surprise attack was not merely a military strike; it was launched in the midst of ongoing peace talks. To strike while negotiating is the absolute most serious breach of diplomatic trust possible. It signals that words are meaningless and that force is the only language recognized by Washington. For Iranian leadership, any verbal assurance offered today carries the weight of tomorrow’s tweet. Diplomacy requires a foundation of credibility; that foundation has been systematically dismantled.
Second, the ideological makeup of the opposing governments creates a structural barrier to compromise. The current Israeli government is composed of extremist Zionists whose platform often rejects coexistence in favor of maximalist territorial and security demands. Simultaneously, Christian Zionists hold an important role in the Trump administration, viewing conflict in the Middle East through a theological lens that favors escalation over diplomacy. This alignment makes compromise with Iran inherently harder. For these factions, concession is not strategy; it is heresy. What demands could Iran make that would credibly constrain Israeli action? Binding security guarantees from the United States would be required, yet Washington’s ability to restrain its ally in moments of crisis is historically limited. Conversely, any Iranian demand for verifiable, long-term restrictions on Israeli military operations would likely be viewed in Jerusalem as an unacceptable infringement on sovereignty – a potential casus belli in itself.
Third, any serious Iranian negotiation would inevitably demand the removal of American military bases from the Persian Gulf. From Tehran’s perspective, these installations are not defensive outposts but forward operating bases for coercion and regime-change planning. Their presence is an existential threat. Yet for any American president, particularly one branding himself as a champion of strength, agreeing to withdraw forces from Bahrain, Qatar, or Kuwait would be politically untenable. It would be framed domestically not as diplomacy, but as retreat. Trump, who measures success in visible, declarative terms, could not sell a deal that requires abandoning strategic assets as a victory.
Fourth, Iran would demand the immediate and comprehensive lifting of sanctions. The economic toll of the pressure campaign has been severe, but capitulation without full relief would be seen as surrender. However, an immediate, total sanctions lift is a non-starter for the administration. It would undermine the central lever of U.S. pressure and invite fierce criticism from allies and domestic opponents alike.
And it is not worth even discussing the reaction to likely Iranian demands for reparations from America or Israel.
Underpinning all these structural obstacles is a profound cultural and emotional reality. Iran has raised the red flag of revenge. For Shiites, this is not merely political rhetoric; it is a religious imperative rooted in the tragedy of Karbala. Martyrdom and the justice due to martyrs cannot be so easily forgotten or forgone for political expediency. The rage in Iran for the February 28 attack is enormous, compounded by the perfidy of being struck during negotiations. A return to the status quo ante is not possible. The leadership that agrees to such terms risks being seen as weak, or worse, complicit in the betrayal of the faithful. And let us not forget, it is the son of the murdered Supreme Leader who has now been chosen as the new spirutual leader of Iran. This selection, in itself, can be seen as a slap in the face for Trump, who was demanding a say in the selection of the new leader.
The Trump administration appears to operate under the assumption that it holds total control over the escalation and de-escalation process. This is a critical miscalculation. Iran is not a passive recipient of U.S. policy but a strategic actor with its own red lines, domestic imperatives, and regional alliances. Tehran has demonstrated both the capacity and the will to act, and to retaliate when necessary. Diplomacy is a dialogue, not a dictate.
The central question, therefore, is not whether the United States can offer an off-ramp, but whether Iran can accept it. If the answer is no – and the points above suggest compelling reasons why it might be – then the conflict enters a more dangerous, protracted phase. Miscalculation risks increase. The assumption that pain alone will produce compliance ignores the role of pride, sovereignty, faith, and survival in strategic decision-making. Before celebrating a potential exit, policymakers must confront an uncomfortable truth: Iran has a say. And if Tehran chooses to say no, the path forward grows darker, longer, and far less certain. Added to this, Trump’s emotional, some would say vindictive, character would suggest that an Iranian refusal would lead him to escalate further.
Therefore this potential off-ramp may exist on a map in Washington, but in Tehran, the road ahead may still lead only forward, into not a storm, but a full blown global hurricane.
Trump Threatens to ‘Hit’ Iran ‘Twenty Times Harder’ Over Strait of Hormuz Oil Flows
Sputnik – 10.03.2026
US President Donald Trump warned Iran against disrupting oil shipments through the Strait of Hormuz, saying Washington would respond with far stronger military action.
“If Iran does anything that stops the flow of Oil within the Strait of Hormuz, they will be hit by the United States of America TWENTY TIMES HARDER than they have been hit thus far,” President Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social.
He added that the US could target sites that would make it “virtually impossible for Iran to ever be built back, as a Nation, again,” while saying he hopes such a scenario “does not happen.”
Trump described the policy as “a gift from the United States of America to China, and all of those Nations that heavily use the Hormuz Strait.”
Featured Video
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Israel Would Have No Qualms About USS Liberty-Style FALSE FLAG If Iran Campaign Falters – Analysts
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 18.06.2025
Donald Trump is mulling whether or not to join Israel’s aggression against Iran as Tel Aviv faces problems sustaining its defenses against growing counterstrikes, and apparently lacks a realistic game plan for an end to hostilities after failing to achieve its goals. Analysts told Sputnik how the US could be ‘nudged’ into the conflict.
“The US is already assisting Israel with supplies, intel, refueling support, etc. One of the many US posts in the region could be attacked for a casus belli,” former Pentagon analyst Karen Kwiatkowski explained.
“If Trump doesn’t comply with Israel’s demand” and join its aggression voluntarily, “a false flag may be needed” to drag the US in, Kwiatkowski, retired US Air Force Lt. Col.-turned Iraq War whistleblower, fears.
Netanyahu has a diverse array of options at his disposal, according to the observer, including:
- a false flag against US assets abroad blamed on Iran or one of its Axis of Resistance allies, like the Houthis
- a US domestic attack or assassination blamed on Iran
- Iranian air defenses ‘accidentally’ hitting a civilian jetliner carrying Americans
- use of a dirty bomb or nuclear contamination somewhere in the region blamed on Iran
- even blackmailing by threatening to use nukes against Iran if the US doesn’t join the fight
Kwiatkowski estimates that Israel probably has “enough blackmail power” against President Trump and Congress to avoid the necessity of a false flag operation, but a “USS Liberty-style” attack, targeting the soon-to-be-retired USS Nimitz supercarrier that’s heading to the Middle East, for example, nevertheless cannot be ruled out entirely, she says. … continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- Smotrich calls for annexation of South Lebanon to Litani River
- Echos of Gallipoli? Hormuz and the Geography of Hubris
- Pakistan PM backs Iran’s right to self-defense amid tensions
- Hungary blasts ‘fake’ EU accusation
- SAFE Debt Trap: Poland’s €43.7 Billion Bet on Unipolar Illusion
- War on Iran threatens global Gulf capital flows: FT analysis
- Mossad De Facto Admits To Inciting Riots In Iran
- Tehran: World grown thoroughly exhausted with US-Israeli ‘false flag storylines’
- Trump ‘stuck between a rock and a hard place’, lacks Iran war strategy: Ex-CIA chief
- Trump’s bombardment of fake news so far is working quite well. But where is it heading?
- If Americans Knew
- From Sde Teiman, the truth about Israel’s military justice system has been set free
- Child denied life-saving bone marrow transplant by Israel ‘because he is from Gaza’
- Raffi Berg: BBC Middle East Editor Exposed as CIA, Mossad Collaborator
- Jerusalem Archbishop Rebukes Netanyahu’s Statements on Christianity
- US to embed Palantir AI across entire military: Report
- Israeli-US war on Iran to drag on “a few more weeks” – Not a ceasefire Day 164
- Lebanon deaths top 1,200; Palantir AI to be embedded across US military – Not a ceasefire Day 163
- Israel’s assassination game: Take all pragmatists off the board
- Food shortages return to Gaza as Israel tightens aid restrictions under the cover of its war on Iran
- Trump demands trillions in payments from Gulf countries, billions from Harvard – Not a ceasefire Day 162
- No Tricks Zone
- 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
- Former Pfizer Toxicologist Dr. Helmut Sterz Tells Bundestag Hearing Pfizer Vaccine Should Have Never Been Approved
- Energy Expert: Germany’s Nuclear Phaseout Was A “500 Billion Euro Mistake”
- New Research: South Australia’s Mid-Holocene Sea Surface Temperatures Were 4°C Warmer Than Today
- Storing Green Energy To Last Germany 10 Days Would Require A 60-Million Tonne Battery
- New Studies: UK Sea Levels Were 4 Meters Higher Than Today During The Mid-Holocene
- Destructive Green New Deal: German Energy And Metal Group Warns Of Drastic Crisis
- New Study Documents A 20-Year Pause In Arctic Sea Ice Decline – Driven By Internal Variability
- Wake-up Call: Survey Shows Majority Of Germans Now Favor Postponing Climate Targets!
Aletho News 