Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

What a War on Iran Would Really Look Like — Beyond the Regime-Change Fantasy

By Robert Inlakesh | The Palestine Chronicle | January 19, 2026

While the corporate media and social media influencers run non-stop regime change propaganda, replete with unverified statistics, fabricated claims, and the denial of objective reality, it is important to cut through this and ask the more important question: What will a regime change war on Iran look like?

The following analysis must be first prefaced by stating that the unrelenting wave of regime change propaganda currently being disseminated with the implicit intent of manufacturing consent for war is, in essence, no different from the claims and rhetoric used over decades to justify various other wars of aggression.

Last year, Israel attacked Iran in a blatant violation of the United Nations Charter, and was later followed by the United States, which also participated in illegal aggression. Although it should be noted that using the metrics of International Law is at this stage redundant, as it has been rendered null and void by the US-Israeli alliance since October 7, 2023.

In the immediate aftermath of last June’s 12-Day-War, US-based pro-war think-tanks ranging from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD) all the way to the Atlantic Council, all began scheming about what the next round should constitute and its intended outcomes. Meanwhile, on July 7, Axios News cited its sources claiming that Israel was already seeking a greenlight for a new attack and that it believed the US would grant it.

Fast forward to December 28, 2025, when peaceful protests erupted in Iran over government mismanagement of the worsening economic crisis, caused by Western economic sanctions. The very next day, December 29, former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett posted a video talking about a mass anti-government uprising, which had not yet happened. His message was accompanied by countless old videos and AI-generated footage depicting such a rebellion.

As this was happening, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was visiting US President Donald Trump at Mar-a-Lago, where, according to several media reports, he was requesting an American attack on Iran and had received everything he had asked for. At the beginning of January 2026, violent elements suddenly emerged, and protests calling for the fall of the government began.

On January 8, 9, and 10, the situation dramatically escalated as Iran shut off the internet across the country. The footage revealed that the largest crowds participating in the riots and protests numbered only in the tens of thousands, yet numerous rioting groups emerged throughout the country.

The Western media and pro-Israeli social media influencers had by this time constructed their own narratives that deemed what was happening a “revolution” of “millions across Iran” and that peaceful protesters were being slaughtered for standing up for their freedom.

Without going into the fine details, it suffices to say that what we see portrayed in the corporate media about Iran is a reflection of a parallel universe. There is a total denial of any nuance, an inability to accept mass pro-government demonstrations that were bigger than the riots that occurred, a refusal to air the countless videos of armed militants on the streets and mass destruction caused by rioters.

Instead, Iran is an “evil regime” that is “slaughtering its own people” for absolutely no reason beyond that they are peacefully protesting for their freedom. There is also a particular focus on women’s rights when it comes to this propaganda. Even those who accept that over 160 members of the Iranian security forces were killed, including some who were beheaded and set on fire, still uphold that a peaceful revolution occurred. One that they all claimed would topple the government in days or weeks.

You need only look back over the past decades to see the same regime change scripts in action. The Colonial Feminism employed to justify these wars of aggression has been apparent throughout, especially in the case of Afghanistan. Yet, after 20 years of war and 2 trillion dollars in taxpayer dollars later, it was clear that the US’s longest war had nothing to do with “liberating the women of Afghanistan”.

Bear in mind also that atrocity propaganda can come from so-called trusted sources, especially when used to drum up support for such a major foreign policy objective as overthrowing the Iranian government. For example, Amnesty International gave credit to totally fabricated claims that Iraqi soldiers had thrown babies out of incubators in the lead-up to the First Gulf War.

Former Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi was also accused of “killing his own people” as the justification for NATO intervention, while it was claimed that peaceful protesters sought to achieve democracy. Then came a tirade of totally fabricated statistics and outlandish stories, none of which the corporate media dare challenge.

Every time it’s the same cycle, a totally fictitious narrative is constructed as a means of justifying a kind of “humanitarian intervention”, after which everyone will later acknowledge much of it was exaggerated or outright false. Then, anyone challenging this is labelled a “regime puppet” and called names to delegitimise their arguments. Disgruntled members of that nation’s diaspora are also employed to come up with sob stories and advocate regime change, a cheap identity politics trick.

What Will A War On Iran Look Like

A war with Iran could go in many different directions, depending on a large number of variables and how countless actions factor into decision-making on all sides. Therefore, the first point of entry into this brief analysis should be the reality inside Iran and separating this from the fictional depictions provided by the corporate media.

Iran is not Venezuela, nor is it Syria. The Islamic Republic of Iran, for a start, possesses military capabilities that are beyond any other player in West Asia, with exceptions of the Israelis and Turkish militaries. Even in these cases, they do not possess the volume of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, or drones that Iran has mass-manufactured.

What Tehran lacks in terms of the latest in technological development, it makes up for with its offensive missile and drone arsenal, enabling it to hit the Israelis and US bases across the region. These capabilities are now tried and tested on the battlefield.

On the ground, Iran has its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) along with its regular army. The conservative estimates put the total active personnel of the IRGC at around 190,000 men strong, while the regular army is said to have 420,000 active duty members. In addition to this, there is a volunteer paramilitary force known as the Basij, which is said to be able to mobilise over a million fighters if needed.

The Iranian military is well trained, well armed and is constantly running exercises designed to combat insurgencies and foreign invasion forces. Iran’s terrain is also mountainous and vast, meaning that even in the event that mistakes are made, there is room for them to then regain lost ground. All previous US war games estimated that an invasion of Iran in the early 2000’s would have been a disaster for American forces. This was before the Iranians developed militarily in the way they have over the past decade or so.

Millions of Iranians who have demonstrated they will come to the streets in order to protest in solidarity with their government is also a strong sign of the base of support behind the current government. Although survey data is scarce, a large portion of the Iranian population is indeed socially conservative and believes in the religious doctrine of the Islamic Republic.

Another element to consider here is that the Iranian opposition has no real leader. The son of the Shah has a very small base of support inside Iran and is widely regarded as no more than an Israeli puppet. Then we have the Iranian minorities, who have managed to coexist much better under the Islamic Republic than the former Shah’s rule, as the Shia religious system does not rule for the Persian majority alone and does not have the same ethno-supremacist tendencies as previous Iranian leaderships.

On top of Iran’s own forces, there are also its regional allies. These include Ansarallah in Yemen, the Iraqi Hashd al-Shaabi, the Afghan Fatimeyoun, Pakistani Zeinabiyoun, the entire Palestinian resistance, and Hezbollah in Lebanon. These are the main players, but there are also various other groups that they have partnered with.

There is also a question mark surrounding what role China will play in support of Iran, while it is expected that Russia will also provide some kind of assistance. Beijing, in particular, cannot afford the fallout of losing Iranian oil and has already signed an economic partnership deal with Tehran.

Understanding all, there are clearly various cards that the Iranians have to play, and the idea that the government would simply fall without a fight and that its leadership would flee is pure fantasy. Several scenarios could play out given a war opens, including the following:

  1. Iran initiates a preemptive series of strikes.
  2. The US bombs Iran symbolically and tries to fight a limited conflict.
  3. An Israeli-US total regime change plot is hatched.

To address the first way this could unfold, it may be possible that, given the failure of the riots to create major fractures in the Islamic Republic’s system and drag the country to civil war, the US and Israelis may be trying to bait Iran into attacking first. The reason for this would be so they are able to gauge how broad the confrontation will be from the opening round of strikes and then adjust their own offensive from there. This kind of conflict would likely be limited.

The next option would be a US air campaign designed to deal a blow to Iran, with the hope that it could also lead to a change of events that results in regime change, but primarily to send a message and extend the conflict to another round. Such an exchange could end up getting out of hand, depending upon how both sides choose to retaliate against each other’s actions, yet the goal would be to avoid a long war.

If these kinds of 12-Day-War style rounds are to keep occurring each year or so, then this would greatly favour Iran. This is the case as Iran replaces its stockpiles infinitely quicker than the US and Israel.

Then there is the worst-case scenario, an all-out regime change war. Whether this arrives through a series of waves of attacks, both from the air and using militants on the ground, or through a tit-for-tat escalation that leads to it, expect enormous death and destruction on all sides.

There can be no disputing the US military edge here from the air, although an air campaign alone will not topple the government. If this happens, the worst-case scenario will be that the US will strike Iran repeatedly, perhaps alongside Israel’s attacks, assassinating political and military leaders, taking out weapons depots, missile launch sites, infrastructure targets, government buildings, and cultural sites. If Iran is unable to effectively defend from such an assault, it should be expected that it will take around 4 days to get on its feet.

This being said, such an assault would likely radicalise the population and make them double down. If the US and Israel succeed at assassinating Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, then we should expect an unprecedented war that may even extend beyond the region. More than being the Iranian Supreme Leader, he is also a Shia Spiritual leader, meaning his role transcends that of a leader of a country. It would be the equivalent of assassinating the Pope.

Iran itself has several options: to pound American bases, strike US aircraft carriers, launch much larger waves of ballistic missiles into Israel, and at this point, it is likely its allies would have mobilised. The Iranians themselves could shut down the Persian Gulf by locking the Gulf of Hormuz, inflicting a global economic crisis.

Hezbollah, Ansarallah, the Hashd al-Shaabi, Zeinabiyoun, Fatemeyoun, and Palestinian factions could all then participate in an all-out war, one from which there is no turning back. For the Shia in particular, their ideology is not one of backing down in these situations; they will very likely interpret such circumstances as their equivalent to the battle of Karbala, where the Prophet of Islam’s grandson Hussein was martyred.

If this becomes an all-out battle, everyone will take the gloves off, and the only way the Israelis will likely prove capable of escaping is to begin using nuclear weapons, which may not even work.

Although the doomsday scenario is possible, it is likely the war will end before it gets to that stage, and although all of Iran’s allies may participate this time, it would appear the US would like to refrain from entering a long, unpopular, and unwinnable war of aggression. The Trump administration likes quick wars that don’t take much time and runs away when things don’t go their way, as we saw with their attack on Yemen.

It should be expected that the Israelis and their Western allies throw the kitchen sink at Iran in an attempt to manufacture civil war, also. So far, the Syriaization of Iran has failed, but this isn’t to say they will give up on implementing such an agenda.

All of this is to say that regime change in Iran is not a simple matter of committing a few airstrikes; it is an ideologically driven State with mass support and a large number of allies willing to fight on its side. Therefore, the likelihood of the Islamic Republic of Iran falling in a few days or weeks is outlandish to say the least.

– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.

January 18, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Latest US-backed regime change operation in Iran hits the wall

By Samuel Geddes | Al Mayadeen | January 17, 2026

Having bombed the country in 2025, “Israel” and the US seemed to think that provoking street violence would have more success at collapsing the Iranian state. Instead, it fizzled almost instantly.

We have been here at least half a dozen times in the past two decades. Street protests in Iran over an internal economic, social or political issue emerge, gather a degree of momentum in urban areas and the Western propaganda system declares that the protests have “shifted” from their initial focus, to calls for the repudiation of the Islamic Revolution and the end of the political system it created. European and American politicians issue their empty statements of solidarity with the Iranian people and unilaterally decide that the Islamic Republic has “lost its legitimacy,” that its fall is simply a matter of “when,” not “if.” We have seen this narrative played out often enough to recognize it never survives contact with the real world.

The source of the persistent delusion that the Islamic Republic is about to fall comes not only from the Euro-American elite class wishing it to be so, but also from its deferral to the “analysis” of segments of the diaspora whose own political objectives are detached from reality.

Whether it is protests over the government’s handling of the economy, energy blackouts, or the water crisis, most external observers are incapable of viewing each individual issue through any lens other than that of regime change.

This time around the US and Israelis, in coopting the protests to destabilize the country through street violence, have not even bothered to hide their involvement. It has also not helped the West’s case that it is now feigning “humanitarian concern” for the rights of Iranian citizens while it has spent more than two years facilitating the ongoing slaughter and starvation of Gaza’s population. Any observer following both issues can detect the dissonance and conclude what is motivating the frantic calls to escalate the situation into military intervention. That is, the desire to crush a state and society that has resisted Western dominance for more than four-and-a-half decades.

The brazenness of the West’s affected concern for the well-being of the Iranian public is particularly galling in light of the sanctions. If Iranians’ living standards were really of any concern to Washington, London or Brussels, they would start by unconditionally ending their economic strangulation in effect against the country. The truth is that the suffering and misery engendered by the sanctions is entirely the point. As well as stifling the development of an independent state outside the globalized-Western economy, the siege is specifically intended to make living conditions unbearable for the average Iranian so that they are incentivized to undermine the Islamic Republic. The continuation of the sanctions is a barely disguised punishment of the Iranian public for not pursuing the West’s geopolitical goal of regime-change for them.

Were it not glaringly obvious to the Trump administration before the latest unrest, it surely is now that the exiled political diaspora most actively pushing for the fall of the Islamic Republic through Western military action are entirely incapable of political organization. Even the least crazed fan of the defunct Pahlavi dynasty is pathologically hostile to the terrorist personality cult of the MEK, as much as they are to the Islamic Republic itself. There simply is no political alternative, to say nothing of whether it even has any domestic support, waiting to replace the Islamic Republic.

Flush from the “success” of his abducting Venezuelan president Maduro, Trump seemed temporarily convinced he might have a similar option here, to carry out a meaningless military stunt for which he can take credit and declare “victory.” His problem is that there is no level of open military action against Iran that would allow him to do this without igniting a regional war that destroys the global economy.

This realization, if he has come to it, would explain his backtracking on the red lines he set, that any executions would trigger US attacks. If a controlled, stage-managed performance is his goal, as it almost always is, then the confrontation with Iran leaves him with no viable option but to back down.

The absence of any realistic military option has now seen both the US and Europe revert to their standard tactic; the intensification of the sanctions they have used to punish the Iranian people. Trump’s latest declaration of a 25% tariff on any country trading with Iran is his way of giving himself an off-ramp, for now, from a crisis that is largely of his making.

January 17, 2026 Posted by | Wars for Israel | , , , , , | Leave a comment

“Real men go to Tehran” — The Zion-Con fantasy of regime change in Iran

By Junaid S. Ahmad | MEMO | January 16, 2026

“Anyone can go to Baghdad. Real men go to Tehran.”

It is difficult to imagine a sentence that more perfectly distils the arrested adolescence of American neoconservatism. Equal parts locker-room bravado and imperial hallucination, the phrase belongs to the same intellectual ecosystem as Rambo sequels, Tom Clancy paperbacks, and the enduring belief that history naturally submits to men armed with air superiority and a television-ready talking point.

The slogan has circulated for decades among Washington’s most aggressively incurious minds. Iraq was merely the appetizer. Tehran was always the entrée — the Everest of regime change, the final boss in a video game played by men who have never once paid the price of defeat.

Iran is not different merely because of its size, its population, or its terrain — though the Zagros Mountains are far less forgiving than the streets of Fallujah. Iran is different because it has refused, stubbornly and at enormous cost, to internalise the post–Cold War catechism: accept American primacy, subcontract your sovereignty, and call the arrangement “integration into the international order.”

For the ‘Zion-Cons’ — Zionist neoconservatives — this refusal is not simply strategic defiance. It is psychological heresy.

The theology of regime change 

Neoconservatism is not a foreign-policy framework. It is a belief system. Like all theologies, it comes equipped with sacred texts, sanctioned demons, and end-times fantasies. Iran occupies a unique place in this cosmology: simultaneously an ideological abomination and a geopolitical temptation too intoxicating to abandon.

The Islamic Republic represents everything neocon thought cannot tolerate — an independent regional power immune to Western legitimacy rituals, rooted in a civilizational memory more than a millennium older than Washington itself. That it is also openly hostile to Israel, and persistently aligned with Palestinian resistance, elevates Iran from problem to obsession.

This obsession is always framed as concern. Concern for democracy. Concern for women’s rights. Concern for regional stability. Yet the concern follows a suspiciously selective pattern. It spikes when Iranian women protest. It flattens when women in Gaza are buried beneath concrete and shrapnel. It demands sanctions in the name of “helping the Iranian people” while celebrating the annihilation of Iran’s middle class as a strategic achievement.

This is not hypocrisy. It is architecture.

Sanctions are not a failed alternative to regime change; they are its slow-motion variant. When bombing proves politically inconvenient, starvation becomes policy. When diplomacy threatens stabilisation, diplomacy must be sabotaged. Engagement is dangerous precisely because it works. The objective is not reform. The objective is obliteration.

Israel’s strategic mirage

For Israel’s security establishment, Iran is the final unresolved obstacle in a region otherwise disciplined into submission. Egypt neutralised. Syria pulverised. Iraq shattered and held together with duct tape. Lebanon perpetually destabilised. Only Iran remains intact and intolerably autonomous.

The idea that Israel’s posture toward Iran has ever been defensive borders on parody. The fear is not that Iran will strike tomorrow; it is that Iran will exist coherently ten years from now.

This explains the fixation on Iran’s air defences, its scientists, its infrastructure. The logic is brutally simple: a state that cannot defend itself cannot act independently. A state that cannot act independently can eventually be wrecked, partitioned, and remade.

But here the fantasy collides with reality. Iran is not Syria. It is not Libya. It is not Iraq circa 2003 — hollowed out by sanctions and ruled by a dictatorship so despised that collapse felt like relief. Iran, like all societies, contains fractures and rivalries. But fragmented societies do not automatically disintegrate. Quite often — especially under existential threat — they consolidate. External assault does not reliably dissolve states. Sometimes it forges them.

The opposition mirage

Every regime-change project requires a hero. In Iran’s case, while ritualistic nods are made toward protesters with genuine grievances, the starring role is awkwardly reserved for an exile aristocracy whose Twitter/X followings vastly exceed their domestic relevance.

Reza Pahlavi is marketed like a Silicon Valley prototype: sleek, Western-approved, and permanently “almost ready.” His appeal thrives in think tanks, donor salons, and Israeli conference halls. Inside Iran, his name provokes neither mass devotion nor visceral hatred — just indifference at best, uncontrollable laughter at worst.

This is the core contradiction of Washington’s Iran policy: regime change without revolution; installation without legitimacy; democracy without the inconvenience of mass politics.

The resulting strategy is perversely elegant in its cynicism — wait for collapse while ensuring no alternative survives long enough to govern.

Civil war option

What follows regime collapse? Zion-Con discourse treats the question like a software update users will sort out later. Something, it is assumed, will emerge. Something manageable. Something vaguely liberal.

History offers no such reassurance

Iran’s disintegration would not yield a liberal republic — and it is not meant to. It would yield precisely what Zion-Cons privately welcome: centrifugal violence, ethnic fragmentation, militia economies, refugee flows that would make Syria look like a rehearsal dinner. Kurdish separatism. Baloch insurgency. Nuclear insecurity. The scenario reads less like a transition plan than a controlled demolition spiralling out of control.

For Washington and Tel Aviv, this is not a deterrent. It is an acceptable – perhaps even desirable – outcome. A broken Iran is preferable to a strong one, even if the shards cut indiscriminately.

The masculinity problem

“Real men go to Tehran” is not merely rhetoric. It is theatre. It reflects a masculinity crisis at the heart of American empire — a compulsion to prove relevance through violence because legitimacy has evaporated.

Short wars. Clean optics. Cinematic strikes. The problem with Iran is that it refuses to follow the script. There is no “Mission Accomplished” banner waiting in the Persian Gulf. There is only attrition, retaliation, and the dawning realisation that power is not a substitute for strategy.

The endgame nobody admits

The scarcely concealed truth is that regime change in Iran is not primarily about Iran. It is about preserving Zionist hegemony in the region. An Iran that survives sanctions, absorbs pressure, and refuses submission is contagious. It teaches others that defiance is survivable.

That lesson is intolerable

So, the fantasy endures. The slogans recycle. The men who went to Baghdad insist they are wiser now — just before deliberately repeating the same catastrophe, only on a grander scale.

But Tehran is not a sequel. It is a reckoning. And this time, the audience will not be so forgiving.

January 16, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Venezuela Has Right to Have Relations With China, Russia, Cuba, Iran – Acting President

Sputnik – 16.01.2026

Venezuela has the right to relations with all countries of the world, including China, Russia, Cuba, and Iran, and will exercise this right in compliance with international norms, Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodriguez said on Thursday.

Venezuela’s Acting President Delcy Rodríguez said the country’s energy dialogue with the United States is not new, but stressed that it is now taking place amid “aggression and a fierce threat.”

“Venezuela has the right to relations with China, with Russia, with Cuba, with Iran — with all the peoples of the world,” Rodríguez said while presenting the government’s 2025 annual report.

She said Caracas is shaping energy cooperation based on “decency, dignity and independence,” rejecting both internal and external constraints aimed at influencing Venezuela’s foreign policy.

January 16, 2026 Posted by | Economics | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

US Sending Troops to Middle East Over Trump’s Threats Against Iran – Reports

Sputnik – 16.01.2026

WASHINGTON – The United States is sending troops to the Middle East over the consideration of potential strikes on Iran by President Donald Trump, Fox News reported on Thursday, citing military sources.

At least one US aircraft carrier is moving toward the region amid the growing tensions, the report said.

“US military assets are preparing to move to the Middle East, likely to include at least one aircraft carrier and additional missile defense systems that will operate from air, land and sea,” Fox News’ Chief National Security Correspondent Jennifer Griffin said on air.

However, it is unknown whether it is USS Abraham Lincoln, which is currently operating in the South China Sea, or one of the two carriers that left US bases earlier this week, the report added.

President Donald Trump has been presented with military options and favors any action being “swift and decisive,” while avoiding a wider regional war, according to the report.

Iranian state media, cited by Fox News, issued a warning to Washington: “You hit. We hit.”

January 16, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

The anti-Iran human rights bazaar

By Karim Sharara | Al Mayadeen | January 16, 2026

Mainstream media’s reliance on US-funded “Iranian human rights” NGOs reveals a recycled regime-change pipeline, where anonymous activists are used with opaque finances to treat propaganda like facts.

“2,000 protesters killed, activists say.”

My, my, it seems anonymous activists are really all the rage in Western media, with this headline being parroted (in multiple forms, no doubt). Because if it’s in The Guardian, BBC, and CNN, among others, it has to be “true”, particularly when it’s Iran they’re talking about.

But really, journalistic integrity is about citing sources, and if these “unbiased”, “professional”, and “objective” outlets are good at anything, it’s choosing the proper organizations to cite, which are in no way affiliated with suspect sources.

After all, it’s not suspect if it’s the CIA or the US federal government, right?

Human Rights Activists in Iran (HRANA)

Take HRANA, for instance, which is THE go-to “agency” cited by Western media.

Arrest figures? HRANA.
Death tolls? HRANA.
Names of the arrested? HRANA.
Claims of repression cited by Reuters, AP, the BBC, CNN, and The New York Times? HRANA.

According to its website, “Human Rights Activists in Iran (also known as HRAI and HRA) is a non-political and non-governmental organization comprised of advocates who defend human rights in Iran. HRAI was founded in 2005.”

Contrary to the name, the Human Rights Activists in Iran organization is not, in fact, in Iran, but rather operates from the comfort of Virginia, in the United States. Kind of like when you buy Brussels sprouts expecting something European but then find out they were “imported” from California.

HRANA also makes this claim: “Because the organization seeks to remain independent, it doesn’t accept financial aid from either political groups nor governments.”

Oddly enough, no Western media source has disclosed that HRANA is being funded by the NED (National Endowment for Democracy), which was established to keep CIA funding covert, according to its co-founder Allen Weinstein, who had said, “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA.”

HRANA was founded by Keyvan Rafiee in 2006, in Virginia, and according to tax filings dating back to 2012 (when Rafiee only got $59,000 in tax-exempt donations) he is now raking in a comfortable $1 million dollars in donations.

In total, Rafiee has taken $10.7 million from 2012 to 2015, no doubt from “good Samaritans” donating funds to his Patreon.

CHRI

The Center for Human Rights in Iran (CHRI), much like HRANA, is also being cited by mainstream media as a credible source, amassing “over 7,000 international media citations in 2022,” according to its own website. Also like HRANA, it identifies itself as an “independent, nonpartisan” nonprofit organization (seems like it’s a mantra they all use).

With nonprofit being the keyword here, Hadi Ghaemi, CHRI’s founder and executive director, gave himself more than $200,000 in compensation from US taxpayer money just last year for his tiring work in advancing human rights, almost double the $105,000 he received in 2013.

It’s noteworthy that Ghaemi had claimed in 2009 that he had never received any sort of funding from the US government or NED, speaking in particular regarding his work for United4Iran, another organization he founded.

From 2012 to 2024, CHRI, registered as Campaign For Human Rights Inc and tax-exempt since 2011, has received $16.3 million, also in tax-exempt donations. However, because of the lack of transparency regarding the organization’s finances, the source of the funding could not be ascertained.

Tavaana

One of the most active organizations among Iranian dissident groups is Tavaana. On its website, it brands itself as “Iran’s premier civic education and civil society capacity building initiative.” You’d think to yourself it’s based in Iran until you’re hit quite boldly in the next sentence with “Launched in 2010 with a seed grant from the Bureau for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) at the US Department of State.”

Going through tax files related to Tavaana will net you nothing; that’s because the taxes are filed under the name “E Collaborative For Civic Education,” Tavaana’s parent organization, which has been tax-exempt since 2011. The tax filings show that the organization received grants totaling $250,000 in 2011, which quickly skyrocketed to a high of $1.9 million in 2014. In total, from 2011 to 2024, Tavaana received a total of $15.9 million in donations.

Looking at the scope of activities it’s involved in, and how its online courses are about sharing articles similar to eHow on circumventing internet restrictions in Iran, it’s difficult to see where those millions of dollars went… Either that or they were contracted to write the most expensive compilation of e-brochures.

According to a NED booklet authored by Sherry Ricchiardi for NED’s Center for International Media Assistance (CIMA) and published on March 13, 2014, “The Tavaana project’s parent organization, the E-Collaborative for Civic Education, has received support from the National Endowment for Democracy, the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the United States Agency for International Development.”

“Program Manager Layla Attia listed some of the project’s accomplishments, including 29 e-courses and 47 webinars on such topics as women’s rights, digital safety, gay rights in Islam, social entrepreneurship, democratic institutions, and power searching on Google. Participants connect securely from Iran to anonymous e-classrooms, and so far none have reported being compromised, according to Attia.”

Imagine being an American and finding out that $100,000 of your tax dollars was spent to teach “power searching on Google.”

Tavaana’s co-founders are Akbar Atri and Mariam Memarsadeghi. Atri has largely been inactive on social media since 2018, but Mariam Memarsadeghi paints a different tale. She is an avid supporter of “Israel”, as seen in her bio, which features an Israeli flag, and has even called for US and Israeli strikes on her own country, the last time being just a few days ago:

Perhaps more interestingly, she is also an avid monarchist, who advocates giving power to a man whose sole claim to fame is being born with a saffron spoon in his mouth and who has gone on record saying he doesn’t know what he’ll be going back to, if he ever returns to Iran, suggesting he may live between the US and Iran because he has spent his entire life in the US.

This is the same man who thought showing pictures of himself doing yoga would somehow give him better optics.

One prominent Iranian dissident, Ruhollah Zam, who was involved in directing anti-Iran operations (including teaching rioters how to make homemade weapons through his Amad News Telegram channels), and later captured and repatriated in an intelligence operation, has also gone on record years ago telling people in a video call that he’s seen the late shah’s son practising inspecting troops in front of his bedroom mirror.

Iran Disinformation Project

One short-lived project started directly with US State Department funding was the Iran Disinformation Project, after, according to The Guardian, “it was found to be trolling US journalists, human rights activists and academics it deemed to be insufficiently hostile to the government in Tehran.”

Once @IranDisinfo began targeting mainstream journalists for not being radically anti-Iran, buzzers went off, and their funding was cut. “The bulk of the work by @IranDisinfo has been in line with the scope of a project with the Department of State. We have, however, identified recent tweets that fall outside the scope of the project to counter foreign state propaganda or disinformation,” one State Department spokesperson said.

The tweets in question were then deleted, but funding was not restored. The page can still be seen on Twitter, inactive since 2019.

Boroumand Center for Human Rights in Iran

One of the most effective organizations funded by the National Endowment for Democracy is the Boroumand Center for Human Rights in Iran, co-founded by dissident sisters Ladan and Roya Boroumand. Its board of directors features prominent neocon-turned-something-or-other Francis Fukuyama (post-neocon liberal institutionalist is what my search tells me he is, and for some reason, that’s an actual thing), and prominent Iranian celebrities, such as Nazanin Boniadi.

In 2024, NED presented its “partner” Roya Boroumand a medal “in recognition of her leadership and dedication to the promotion of human rights and democracy in Iran.”

In particular, the NED statement read: “Roya along with her sister Ladan Boroumand, a former Reagan-Fascell Democracy Fellow at NED, have dedicated their lives to upholding human rights in Iran.”

From 2011 to 2024, the Boroumand Center received $13.5 million in tax-exempt donations in the US. Before that, information suggests that it was bankrolled by contributions from foundations, such as the influential right-wing Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars each year per donor.

The Boroumand Center has also collaborated with and received funding from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations.

Curiously, the Center’s What We Do page reads: “Our goal is to prepare for a peaceful and democratic transition in Iran and build a more just future.”

One would think that people who are so avid to preserve democracy and democratic practices, even being honored with prestigious awards for their work, would do better than to amplify a call for the firing of Iranian academics in the US asking questions about the Mossad’s involvement in the riots, particularly ones as distinguished as Hamid Dabashi.

On Jan 12, Ladan Boroumand also amplified a post by Iranian dissident Omid Shams in which he discussed how an attack on Iran can be justified under “humanitarian intervention”.

It seems that a recurring theme of Iranian dissidents abroad is how hard they all cheer for strikes on their own country, but none have taken it as far as Masih Alinejad, who seems to have spearheaded the opposition, much to the chagrin of many dissidents who call her an opportunist.

Through her work in VOA Farsi (VOA meaning Voice of America, because it’s an American network), which is directly funded by the State Department, through which Alinejad has called for strikes, regime change, sanctions, and all manner of actions by the US against her country, she has catapulted into the frontlines of the opposition. She has also received hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments for her work with VOA Farsi.

A regime-change ecosystem

So the next time you’re told, very solemnly, that “2,000 protesters were killed, activists say,” it may be worth asking a dangerous question: which activists, funded by whom, operating from where, and with what openly stated political objectives?

Because what emerges here isn’t an ecosystem of independent human rights advocacy, but a tightly interlinked industry of regime-change NGOs, generously financed by US government cutouts, recycled endlessly through Western newsrooms that treat “Virginia-based Iranian activists” as a substitute for on-the-ground verification.

Maybe the real miracle isn’t that these figures are uncritically repeated, but that after Iraq’s WMDs, Libya’s humanitarian war, Syria’s “moderate rebels”, and every other CIA-flavored moral crusade, we’re still expected to gasp in awe when someone from the mainstream has “trust me bro” for a source.

January 16, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

Report: Kurdish Fighters Have Been Entering Iran From Iraq and Clashing With the IRGC

By Dave DeCamp | The Libertarian Institute | January 14, 2026

Turkish intelligence has warned Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) that Kurdish fighters have been entering Iran from Iraq amid protests inside Iran, Reuters reported on Wednesday.

An unnamed senior Iranian official speaking to the outlet said that the IRGC has been clashing with armed Kurdish fighters dispatched from both Iraq and Turkey. The Kurdistan Freedom Party, or PAK, a Kurdish Iranian separatist group mainly based in Iraq, has been claiming that its armed wing has been conducting operations against Iranian forces.

On Tuesday, the PAK claimed its forces launched an attack on an IRGC base in western Iran. The Reuters report and claims of Kurdish attacks come as Tehran is accusing the US and Israel of arming “terorrists” inside Iran who have attacked Iranian security forces.

The US has a significant presence in Iraqi Kurdistan, including a military base and an $800 million consulate compound that it opened in December. The Israeli Mossad is also known for having a presence in the area, and Iran claimed that it attacked a Mossad base in Iraqi Kurdistan in 2024.

The Mossad has a long history of covert operations inside Iran, and a Farsi-language X account affiliated with the Israeli spy agency suggested it had operatives on the ground in Iran when the protests first broke out. “Let’s come out to the streets together. The time has come. We are with you. Not just from afar and verbally. We are with you in the field as well,” the account said on December 29.

Israel’s Channel 14 has reported that “foreign actors” have armed protesters in Iran and said that’s the reason why hundreds of Iranian security personnel have been killed.

“We reported tonight on Channel 14: foreign actors are arming the protesters in Iran with live firearms, which is the reason for the hundreds of regime personnel killed,” Channel 14 reporter Tamir Morag wrote on X on Tuesday. “Everyone is free to guess who is behind it.”

January 14, 2026 Posted by | Deception, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Trump’s Options in Iran Limited By Military Buildup in Latin America

By Kyle Anzalone | The Libertarian Institute | January 14, 2026

President Donald Trump has a more limited range of options for attacking Iran now than he did in June. The US has moved military assets out of the Middle East in recent months, including moving an aircraft carrier strike group to the Caribbean.

Since the US and Israel’s war against Iran last year, the US has moved two aircraft carrier strike groups out of the Middle East. The USS Nimitz is now at a US port, and the USS Ronald Regan is in Latin America.

An advanced American air defense system that was deployed to the Middle East in June is now back in East Asia. Politico notes, “The Trump administration also has been eating away at dwindling US weapons stockpiles with the fast pace of military operations in the Red Sea, Iran and Venezuela.”

Trump has made several pledges to back Iranian protesters and attack Iran. The lack of available military resources in the region could limit Trump’s operations for attacking Iran, although the US still maintains the capability to strike the Islamic Republic.

Over the past decade, the pace of US military interventions has spread across the globe. Under President Joe Biden, the US flooded weapons to Ukraine and Israel. President Donald Trump has bombed seven countries. Additionally, the US used a significant portion of its arsenal of interceptors to defend Israel from Iranian retaliation in June.

January 14, 2026 Posted by | Militarism | , , | Leave a comment

Former Head of Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate: There’s a ‘very significant influence operation by the US’ in Iran

The Dissident | January 14, 2026

Recently, the Israeli newspaper Maariv interviewed the head of the Military Intelligence Directorat in Israel from 2018-2021, Tamir Hayman, who revealed that the United States currently has a “Significant Influence Operation” on the ground in Iran.

In the interview, Hayman said, “If the question is, is there zero operation right now? The answer is no, because there is already an operation. There is currently a very significant influence operation by the US” referring to the current unrest happening in Iran.

He added, “The sequence of news that is received from within Iran, rumors that are coming, videos that are coming, there are many things that are happening that have no explanation. It could be a coincidence, and it could be something else. Simply put, an influence effort is an effort that operates primarily in the cyber realm, and in the realm of local disruption and subversion, and there are some.”

Along with this, Tamir Hayman, acknowledged that U.S. sanctions were the cause of the economic issues that in Iran that sparked the initial protests in Iran which are apparently being exploited by American and Israeli intelligence, saying, “there is the attempt, as we heard tonight from Trump, that this is a path of negotiation with the Americans, that this is really the only thing that can save the Iranian economy, the lifting of sanctions”.

This comment comes at the same time that Tamir Morag, the Diplomatic Correspondent for the Netanyahu-linked Channel 14 in Israel, reported that “foreign actors are arming the protesters in Iran with live firearms, which is the reason for the hundreds of regime personnel killed.”

American and Israeli officials have been fairly open about the fact that Israeli intelligence is currently operating on the ground in Iran, with the former Secretary of State and CIA director, Mike Pompeo saying, “Happy New Year to every Iranian in the streets. Also, to every Mossad agent walking beside them” and the Israeli Heritage Minister, Amichai Eliyahu saying, “When we attacked in Iran during ‘Rising Lion’ we were on its soil and knew how to lay the groundwork for a strike. I can assure you that we have some of our people operating there right now”.

But now, Tamir Morag has revealed that there are “very significant influence operations by the US” in Iran, which include “operates primarily in the cyber realm, and in the realm of local disruption and subversion” and according to Tamir Morag, apparent operations to arm protestors in Iran to kill Iranian government officials.

Referring to the protests in Iran, the U.S. government connected private intelligence firm Stratfor, wrote, “the United States may also try to intervene, such as by covertly helping to organize the protesters”, something that is apparently already underway through American “influence operations”.

January 14, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Iran protest-riots can only achieve US-Israeli intervention, ‘shadow CIA’ concludes

By Max Blumenthal | The Grayzone | January 13, 2026

Stratfor, the “shadow CIA” which contracts for US intelligence and advises US-backed opposition movements, published an important assessment of the protest-riots in Iran this January 7.

Stratfor concluded that the ultimate utility of the unrest is to create an opening for a US-Israeli bombing campaign:

“While unlikely to collapse the regime, the ongoing unrest could open the door for Israel or the United States to conduct covert or overt activities aimed at further destabilizing the Iranian government, either indirectly by encouraging the protests or directly via military action against Iranian leaders.”

The private spying contractor explained that the external, US-backed Iranian opposition is too fractious and weak to affect change inside Iran, and that the institutions of the Islamic Republic remain united. Therefore, the only impact the protest-riots can achieve is to ease the path for a military campaign by the US and Israel.

Stratfor’s assessment ends by predicting that “renewed military strikes on Iran would also likely put an end to the current protest movement by leading instead to a wider display of Iranian nationalism and unity, a pattern observed after U.S. and Israeli strikes in 2025.”

This is one of the more sober pieces of analysis of the unrest in Iran to emerge from any US intel-aligned outfit. However, with CIA director and “Mossad stenographer” John Ratcliffe controlling Trump’s Iran briefings alongside White House chief of staff and former Netanyahu campaign advisor Suzie Wiles, the president may not have the benefit of such clarity.

January 13, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , | Leave a comment

The Coming War on Iran: What Has Really Been Happening?

By Robert Inlakesh | The Palestine Chronicle | January 13, 2026

The unrest inside Iran was effectively brought to a halt by the authorities, culminating in mass pro-government demonstrations in the millions across the country. Yet, the specter of a US-Israeli regime change operation continues to lie in the wake.

If you have been following the course of the protests/riots inside Iran on social media or in the corporate press, the impression given since the beginning of the year has been that Tehran is on the verge of collapse. Countless false claims were issued regarding the fall of entire cities, the collapse of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), a massacre of peaceful protesters and even that Ayatollah Khamenei was seeking to escape to Moscow.

Evidently, the reality on the ground couldn’t have been more opposite of what the pro-regime change news outlets and social media influence operations have been portraying. Therefore, to understand what is happening, it is important to understand what truly transpired.

The Road to another Regime Change War

Ever since the conclusion of the 12-Day War between Iran and Israel last June, foreign policy hawks have made it abundantly clear that another round of fighting was only a matter of time. In fact, on July 7, 2025, Axios News reported that Israeli officials were already seeking a green-light, from the US President for them to attack Iran again.

Influential pro-Israeli Washington-based think tanks – such as the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), and the Atlantic Council – all agreed that another round would be necessary, yet argued in different ways that the next round would have to result in the closure of the conflict for the foreseeable future.

The reasoning behind this was clear: if the next round was to mirror the 12-Day War, then another round would again become an inevitability. This scenario would mean that every 6-12 months, the conflict would go from Cold to Hot, a predicament that would actually heavily favour Iran.

If Tehran manages to keep repeating a similar series of rounds to what we saw in June of 2025, the Israelis will be at an enormous disadvantage. Not only does Israel have a smaller territory in which to operate, making taking out vital infrastructure easier, but it cannot produce weapons and rebuild at the rate Iran can. For example, the air defence munitions it depleted last year have still not been fully replenished, and many of the sites struck in Tel Aviv remain in ruins.

Iran, on the other hand, has been able to mass-produce ballistic missiles and drones. Western publicly released estimates greatly vary, but often indicate that the Iranians have replenished their arsenals, whereas the indications coming from Iran itself appear to suggest that they have superseded what they previously possessed, both in quantity and quality.

The US and Israel, nevertheless, have clearly been threatening to attack Iran once again for months, using varying excuses about why. Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu has recently been complaining about Iran’s missile program, which quickly became a talking point of the Trump administration, too.

Yet, the moment to attack Iran clearly hadn’t presented itself. There were simply too many variables, too many unknowns, and too many doubts for them to commit any action. We also saw this when it came to Israeli threats against Hezbollah in Lebanon. Even got to the point late last year that Hezbollah’s Secretary General, Naim Qassem, publicly stated that Israel is just bluffing and that although something may happen in the new year, he essentially told the Israelis to shut up and just attack if they were set on doing so.

Why didn’t Israel attack Lebanon? Perhaps the biggest reason why they didn’t is because of Iran and the fear of how far such a war could go. The Israelis attempted assassinations and ramped up their air attacks as a means of attempting to draw a retaliatory strike from Hezbollah, but this failed. Instead, the option left on the table was full-scale war or no war at all.

Then came the pivot to Iran, at least in terms of public propaganda and ramping up rhetoric.

Riots In Iran as A Prelude to War

On December 28, the Israelis spotted a new opportunity. Protests erupted throughout cities across Iran, as mainly shopkeepers took to the streets in order to express their outrage at government mismanagement amidst the ongoing sanctions-induced economic crisis.

To be clear, these protests were totally organic and genuine; they had the backing of major Unions inside the country, and the Iranian government appeared to be quickly engaging with them in order to reach concessions. There was no violence at these protests initially. Even when suspected agent provocateurs had attempted to chant for regime change, shopkeeper protesters had forced them out of their crowds.

By December 29, former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett then posted a video on social media, in which he claimed that Israel was standing with the Iranians “rising up” against their government. Bear in mind that when this address was issued, the situation in Iran was in fact relatively calm, and the widespread riots had not yet taken place.

However, on social media, old videos and AI-generated clips were suddenly spread like wildfire, in a clearly coordinated campaign led by the Israelis and their Iranian opposition allies.

Almost out of nowhere, rioters began to spring up in small groups, primarily in the West of Iran. Some of these rioters carried weapons, but most just committed vandalism and burned down cars or shops. At this point, the protests over the economic crisis began to reduce, to be replaced by anti-government protests. Despite the violence and escalating rhetoric, the authorities in Tehran made sure to distinguish between rioters and legitimate protesters, not bringing down full force against them.

Then came the first day of the New Year, when the violence suddenly exploded. Iranian opposition channels began claiming cities had fallen, which never happened; they claimed millions were rising against the government, which also was not the case. On January 1, two Iranian police officers were murdered, and rioters even executed a young man who belonged to the Basij paramilitary force in the country.

The day after saw all the major Unions condemn the violent rioters, as Israel’s official Persian-language account posted AI-generated images depicting Iran’s police forces hosing down peaceful protesters. Again, the riots escalated and more members of the security forces were murdered, as rioters committed arson attacks.

All of this ended up coming to a head on January 8, as the riots escalated dramatically and this led to Iran shutting down the internet across the country as it took the gloves off and sent its IRGC forces in to stabilise the situation.

The largest recorded anti-government protests, as one called for by the Shah’s son from the comfort of California, numbered no more than in the tens of thousands. It is estimated that at their peak, there were around 40,000 that showed up.

The footage that began emerging from the streets of Tehran and elsewhere was nothing short of shocking, mass destruction and arson against public transit, the burning of mosques, attacks on schools, medical clinics, shops, homes and streets left in ruins as dumpsters were overturned and set alight, along with all the vehicles in sight.

In total, Iran claims that over 100 members of its security forces were murdered, 350 Mosques were set ablaze and 150 ambulances were damaged or destroyed. Civilians were also brutally murdered by the rioters, reportedly including a three-year-old child and a nurse who was burned to death; multiple police officers were also burned alive.

Without needing to go any further, there is copious evidence of armed militants firing on security forces and mass violence committed against civilian infrastructure. What started as a totally normal and organic series of protests was hijacked and turned into an Israeli-backed riot campaign. This was not comparable to the likes of the 2022 or 2009 unrest, which were evidently taken advantage of by Iran’s enemies, but had support from a sizable portion of the population nonetheless.

In the end, it appeared that by January 12, when millions of Iranians came to the streets across the country in solidarity with their government and against the rioters, the Israeli-backed operation had failed.

Yet, the US government had begun to ramp up its direct threats of intervention as the riots died down. Leaving the question open as to when the next round of American strikes would occur, following Donald Trump’s decision to bomb Iran last year.

The real question is whether these riots were a desperate and failed regime change attempt in and of themselves, or this was simply a prelude to what’s coming next. If the Israelis were truly betting on these riots equalling regime change, then perhaps the calculation is for the US to attack in order to revive the riots on the ground.

Alternatively, the instability was only for the purpose of setting up a larger attack, which would mean a much larger war could have been planned. In order for the US and Israel to achieve their desired outcome, that being either regime change or a massive blow that will end the war between Israel and Iran for the foreseeable future, they will likely go after Iran’s infrastructure.

In such a scenario, expect the kitchen sink to be thrown at Iran. Armed terrorist militia insurgencies, airstrikes, agents on the ground, and more riot activity. In particular, attacks on the electrical grid, water, oil, agriculture, and everything that makes the economy function. In other words, an attempt to achieve regime change this way, or to simply make war so costly that Iran won’t seek it for some time afterwards. Perhaps the goal could be to weaken Iran to a degree where it would negotiate on US terms, yet this is highly unlikely.

Iran dealt with these threats by issuing its own, doubling down and adopting an ultra-aggressive posture. What comes next could go many ways, so we are left to wait and see.

– Robert Inlakesh is a journalist, writer, and documentary filmmaker. He focuses on the Middle East, specializing in Palestine. He contributed this article to The Palestine Chronicle.

January 13, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

US Cargo Planes Have Flooded the Persian Gulf Since the First of December

By Larry C. Johnson | SONAR | January 13, 2026 

In December 2025 and January 2026 (through early/mid-January), open-source intelligence (OSINT) and flight-tracking data indicate a significant surge in US military transport aircraft (primarily heavy lifters like C-17 Globemaster III and C-5M Galaxy) flying to or toward US bases in the Persian Gulf, such as Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, with reports consistently describing “dozens” of such movements.

Al Udeid Air Base (also known as Abu Nakhlah Airport) is the largest U.S. military installation in the Middle East, located in the desert approximately 20–35 km (12–22 miles) southwest of Doha, Qatar. It serves as a critical strategic hub for U.S. and allied operations in the region. Al Udeid is the headquarters for the forward element of US Central Command (CENTCOM), US Air Forces Central Command (AFCENT), and the Combined Air Operations Center (CAOC) — which commands and controls airpower across a 21-nation area from Northeast Africa to Central Asia. It also hosts elements of the US Special Operations Command Central and allies like the Royal Air Force (RAF)’s No. 83 Expeditionary Air Group.

Al Udeid is just the tip of the iceberg as far as the US presence in the Persian Gulf is concerned. Here are the other bases:

Naval Support Activity Bahrain (Bahrain, in Manama):

Headquarters for the US Navy’s Fifth Fleet (NAVCENT), responsible for maritime operations in the Persian Gulf, Red Sea, Arabian Sea, and parts of the Indian Ocean.

Hosts ~9,000 personnel (military and civilians).

Key for naval presence, including ships, patrol craft, and support for regional security.

Camp Arifjan (Kuwait, near Kuwait City)

Forward headquarters for US Army Central (ARCENT).

Major logistics, supply, and command hub for ground forces and prepositioned equipment.

Ali Al Salem Air Base (Kuwait, ~40 km from the Iraqi border)

Known as “The Rock”; supports airlift, refueling, transport, and expeditionary air operations (home to the 386th Air Expeditionary Wing).

Camp Buehring (Kuwait, near the Iraq border)

Staging post for Army units deploying to Iraq/Syria and training/operations support.

Al Dhafra Air Base (United Arab Emirates, south of Abu Dhabi)

Shared with UAE Air Force; critical US Air Force hub for reconnaissance, intelligence, fighter operations (e.g., F-22 Raptors), and missions against threats like ISIS.

Prince Sultan Air Base (Saudi Arabia) — Hosts US fighter jets and air defense; reactivated for regional deterrence.

Multiple reports from OSINT sources, flight trackers (e.g., FlightRadar24), and media outlets (including Israeli, European, and international sources) describe dozens of heavy transport aircraft (C-17s and C-5s) departing from US bases, the UK (e.g., RAF Mildenhall), and Germany, heading eastward to Persian Gulf hubs. This activity ramped up notably in early January 2026, with ongoing reports of C-17s, C-5s, and related support aircraft (including tankers like KC-135 and KC-46) en route.

The movements are most likely preparations for an attack on Iran (e.g., protests, air defense boosts), and analysts note similarities to prior buildups. No exact daily or total count is publicly confirmed by the Pentagon, but the scale is described as a “major redeployment” or “heavy airlift,” often in the range of dozens (20–50+ individual aircraft movements, though some may be round-trips or rotations).

In my last piece I listed the deployment of a US carrier task force as a possible indicator of an impending US military attack on Iran. I may be wrong. The surge of US military cargo planes over the last 40 days suggests that the US may opt for an air campaign and is deploying air defense systems to all of the bases listed above in preparation for such an attack. I believe that US planners believe they can knock out Iranian missile sites and, with a bevy of Patriot and THAAD air defense systems, defeat any Iranian retaliation.

All of the information I’ve presented above comes from open source intelligence (OSINT). If I can read it so can the Iranians, the Russians and the Chinese. Would you be shocked to learn that the Russians and the Chinese have satellite systems that are collecting intelligence on these bases as well and passing that information to Iran? Iran will know the location of the US air defense systems.

Based on the Iranian response to the surprise attack on June 13, I expect Iran will initially flood the US bases with drones and older missiles that will drain the US anti-missile defense systems… The US does not have an unlimited supply of Patriot missiles. If Iran has swallowed it pride and has accepted a robust supply of Russian and Chinese air defense units, then it has a better chance of surviving a US attack intended to neutralize Iran’s ability to launch ballistic missiles, which are stored in a number of underground bunkers scattered around Iran.

I still think that the first move by the US will be a cyber attack on Iran’s military command and control system. However, Iran has a robust cyber capability as well and would likely respond in kind to any such attack. Trump will receive a full briefing from Pete Hegseth’s War Department today (Tuesday) and a decision on the US courses of action is likely to follow.

I discussed these issues today with Judge Napolitano and Danny Davis. We also analyzed the war in Ukraine.

January 13, 2026 Posted by | Video | , , , , , | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »