Aletho News

ΑΛΗΘΩΣ

Defeated and delusional: Netanyahu’s remarks reveal $80bn war failure, says analyst

Press TV – April 1, 2026

Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent statements on Iran, claiming that it no longer poses an existential threat to the regime is a complete strategic failure that suggests he is leaving office “defeated,” says an analyst.

Patricia Marins, a Brazilian military analyst, in a post on X on Thursday, characterized Netanyahu’s remarks not as a sign of strength, but as the ultimate admission of failure.

“There is nothing more defeatist than this. It is 100% defeatist rhetoric,” Marins said.

Her critique centers on the unfulfilled war objectives that Netanyahu himself had laid out.

According to Marins, he had consistently articulated three primary goals regarding Iran: regime change, limiting Iran’s missile capabilities, and dismantling its nuclear program.

“He has achieved none of these objectives,” Marins stated.

Instead, she maintained, the war has saddled Israel with staggering economic damage.

Marins cited operational costs and broader economic losses to paint a picture of a war that has yielded no strategic gains at a prohibitive financial price.

“He has saddled Israel with $60-80 billion in losses from this war,” she said, breaking down the daily expenditures. “Each day of operations, including interceptors and material damage, costs between $1.5-2 billion, based on the spending during the 12-day war.”

She noted that the full scope of the damage is still being calculated, with thousands of compensation claims already filed for direct damage caused by Iranian missile attacks.

The analyst said the Israeli ministry of finance estimates the broader economic loss at $3 billion per week.

Marins framed the outcome as a direct consequence of what she called Netanyahu’s “megalomania,” noting that his approach has created more problems than solutions.

The analyst suggested that Israel’s aggressive posture may have backfired strategically regarding Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

“If the Iranians hadn’t built a nuclear weapon before, now they have every reason to do so,” Marins said.

April 1, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism | , , , | Comments Off on Defeated and delusional: Netanyahu’s remarks reveal $80bn war failure, says analyst

Iran’s friends are about to make life much more difficult for Israel and the US

By Murad Sadygzade | RT | April 1, 2026

The war’s second ‘ring of fire’ is no longer forming around Iran. It is already there. What we are witnessing is not a limited clash between a state under pressure and its immediate enemies, but the gradual emergence of a wider regional confrontation in which Tehran’s allied forces are moving from symbolic solidarity to practical engagement.

In Lebanon, Iraq, and now once again in Yemen, groups aligned with Iran are opening new fronts and making any American or Israeli campaign far more difficult to execute. If Iran cannot stop pressure by matching superior military power plane for plane or missile for missile, it can still answer by stretching the battlefield across time and space.

That is the real significance of the current escalation. Wars are easiest to sell and easiest to sustain when they look concentrated, technically manageable, and politically clean. They become much harder to continue when every strike produces another zone of instability, when every advance prompts retaliation, and when every promise of decisive success runs into a new and costly complication.

Iran and the forces loyal to it understand this perfectly well. Their goal is not necessarily to win a spectacular conventional victory over Israel or the US. They are trying to deprive their adversaries of a quick result, to turn military superiority into strategic over-extension, and to make the price of escalation rise with every passing week.

Israel is getting mired in Lebanon

Lebanon has become the clearest example of this dynamic. Israel entered the confrontation with Hezbollah expecting that greater firepower, harsher pressure, and deeper incursions would eventually impose a new reality in the south of the country. But so far the campaign has not produced the kind of result Israeli leaders would need in order to claim genuine success. Israeli officials are still speaking openly about expanding operations and about the need for a broad security zone in southern Lebanon. That does not sound like a completed military mission. It sounds like a campaign still searching for a workable outcome.

Israel remains capable of inflicting enormous damage on Lebanon. It can devastate border villages and infrastructure, and force large numbers of people from their homes. But the ability to destroy is not the same as the ability to impose control. A military campaign can appear overwhelming on television and still fail to neutralize the armed force it was meant to break. Hezbollah remains capable of hitting Israeli territory, and that single fact tells us that the war in Lebanon has not been resolved in Israel’s favor.

Israel is also suffering losses, not only in military terms but in political and psychological terms. Reports of fallen soldiers and continuing battlefield casualties show that Hezbollah is still able to turn southern Lebanon into a dangerous combat zone for the Israeli army. This is important because Israel’s military doctrine relies heavily on speed, on offensive initiative, and on the demonstration of dominance. A campaign that drags on, consumes manpower, exposes soldiers to attrition, and leaves northern Israel under continuing threat is not simply unfinished. It becomes strategically corrosive. It undermines the image of effortless superiority on which deterrence partly depends.

There is also the issue of equipment and operational pressure. Public claims about destroyed Israeli vehicles are often difficult to verify independently, and any serious analysis should avoid repeating battlefield propaganda as fact. But even without dramatic and unverifiable numbers, the broader reality is evident.

Hezbollah continues to create an environment in which Israeli ground operations are costly, risky, and politically burdensome. Israel may seize or enter territory, but it still has not demonstrated that it can transform that presence into a stable and secure military arrangement. As long as Hezbollah keeps imposing losses on Israel, the campaign remains strategically incomplete.

Hezbollah is demonstrating to the entire pro-Iranian regional camp that Israel can be denied a clean military outcome. That message matters in Iraq, in Yemen, and in every arena where forces aligned with Tehran are watching closely. Every week in which Hezbollah continues to strike back weakens the notion that Israel and the US can simply pummel the region into submission through superior firepower. That perception encourages allied groups to escalate because it suggests that resistance is not futile and that prolonged confrontation can produce strategic leverage, even against a stronger opponent.

Iraqi fighters activate

Iraq is the second arena where this logic is becoming visible. For years, Washington tried to handle pro-Iranian armed groups in Iraq through a familiar formula of pressure, selective strikes, deterrent warnings, and political bargaining. That formula is now under severe strain. The Iraqi factions loyal to Iran are again attacking Western interests and American-linked facilities, and their posture is hardening as the regional crisis grows. Any American move toward direct ground involvement against Iran would not remain confined to Iranian territory. It would immediately activate the Iraqi theatre in a much more serious way.

That possibility is now being discussed with increasing seriousness because Iraqi armed groups are presenting themselves as a reserve force that could mobilize in Iran’s favor if the war enters a more dangerous phase. This is not yet a mass transnational deployment on a scale that would determine the outcome of a large war by itself. But that is not the most important issue. The key point is that the Iraqi arena is being prepared politically, organizationally, and psychologically as an extension of the Iranian front. If Washington were to attempt a ground operation against Iran, it would face not one battlefield but several at once.

Washington appears to have assumed that by concentrating military pressure on Iran, it could either isolate Tehran or intimidate its regional allies into caution. But the opposite dynamic is taking shape. Pressure on the center is activating the periphery. Iran’s allies do not need to defeat the US or Israel in direct set-piece battles – only to ensure that no front can be fully closed, no rear area can be treated as safe, and no military plan can be presented as limited and controllable. That alone is enough to alter the political mathematics of war.

The Iraqi dimension is especially dangerous because it sits at the intersection of military operations, internal state weakness, and competing sovereignties. Iraq is not a sealed theatre. It is a country in which militias, parties, foreign forces, and state institutions coexist uneasily. Any renewed cycle of attacks on Western targets can therefore produce consequences far beyond the immediate strike. It can reignite internal tensions, weaken already fragile governance, increase pressure on the Iraqi government, and deepen the long-running struggle over whether Iraq is a sovereign balancing state or a contested zone inside a larger regional conflict. Once that process begins to accelerate, it becomes very difficult to contain.

Yemeni Houthis can shock the global economy

Yet the most strategically explosive development may be the renewed role of Ansar Allah (the Houthis) in Yemen. For nearly a month, the movement was relatively restrained in this specific phase of escalation. That relative quiet led some observers to believe that Yemen might remain a secondary theatre while events centered on Iran, Lebanon, and the Gulf. But this reading now looks premature. Ansar Allah has signaled a return to direct action against Israel, and even more importantly, it has once again raised the specter of pressure on maritime traffic through the Bab el-Mandeb strait.

That threat cannot be dismissed as rhetorical theater. Bab el-Mandeb is one of the great chokepoints of the global economy. It connects the Red Sea with the Gulf of Aden and the Indian Ocean, which means it is part of the shortest maritime route between Europe and Asia through the Suez Canal. If this corridor becomes unsafe on a sustained basis, the consequences extend far beyond the region. Shipping companies reroute. Insurance premiums surge. Delivery times lengthen. Fuel costs rise. Supply chains absorb new friction. The shock travels outward through freight markets, commodity prices, and industrial planning. In the modern world, a narrow stretch of water can become a multiplier of global instability.

This is why even the threat of closure is almost as bad as closure itself. Markets do not wait patiently for a waterway to be blocked in definite terms before reacting. They respond to risk. If Ansar Allah signals that ships tied to Israel or to its supporters may face attack, and if the movement demonstrates that this threat is credible, then the commercial effect begins long before a formal blockade exists. Some carriers will avoid the route. Others will demand sharply higher rates. Naval escorts may become more common. A military problem turns into a commercial one, and a commercial problem soon becomes a macroeconomic one.

A serious disruption in Bab el-Mandeb would also hit the Gulf states in complicated ways. On the surface, high oil prices often appear beneficial for energy exporters. But in wartime the picture is much less straightforward. Gulf monarchies depend not only on price levels but also on predictable flows, secure shipping, investor confidence, infrastructure safety, and the broader perception that the region remains a viable center for trade and finance. A war that pushes up energy prices while simultaneously making maritime transit less secure can produce gains on one side and losses on the other. It can raise revenue while also raising risk. It can improve the price per barrel while damaging the political and logistical environment needed to move that barrel efficiently.

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates in particular would face a difficult balancing act. Both states have tried to reduce their exposure to open-ended regional wars while preserving close security relationships with Washington. But a wider confrontation involving Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon, and Israel would undermine that balancing strategy. Even if they avoid direct military participation, they remain physically embedded in the conflict zone. Their ports, export routes, desalination infrastructure, airports, and industrial facilities exist within missile and drone range of hostile actors. In other words, geography limits neutrality. The Gulf states can try to hedge politically, but they cannot fully hedge physically.

A regional war goes global

The effects on the global economy could be severe if this pattern continues. The most obvious risk is a combined shock to energy and logistics. If pressure on the Strait of Hormuz coincides with renewed disruption in Bab el-Mandeb, the world economy would face stress on two of its most sensitive arteries at once. Oil prices would rise not simply because of lost supply, but because of fear, insurance costs, and the scarcity premium that always appears when multiple chokepoints are threatened simultaneously. Gas markets would become more nervous. Shipping costs would climb. Import-dependent economies would feel the squeeze first, especially poorer countries already vulnerable to debt, inflation, and food insecurity.

This is how regional wars become global economic events. They do not need to shut every route completely or destroy every refinery to trigger wider consequences. They only need to make enough critical routes uncertain at the same time. Once uncertainty spreads across energy and transport, it feeds into everything else: Freight becomes more expensive, manufacturing inputs arrive later, food prices rise through transport and fertilizer costs, central banks face renewed inflation pressure and governments face budget strain. Political instability follows economic stress, especially in countries where societies are already exhausted by previous shocks.

Have the US and Israel miscalculated?

All of this points to a broader conclusion. The conflict is expanding because the forces aligned with Iran are deliberately making it expand. Their strategy is not based on rapid decision or spectacular breakthrough. It is based on the controlled multiplication of pressure points. Hezbollah keeps the northern Israeli front unstable. Iraqi factions raise the cost of any deeper American military involvement. Ansar Allah threatens one of the world’s most important maritime corridors. Iran itself remains the central actor, but it does not need to act alone in a linear and isolated fashion. Its allies provide strategic depth, geographical spread, and the ability to transform one war into several interconnected confrontations.

From this perspective, American planners appear to have miscalculated. They may have believed that forceful pressure would narrow Iran’s options and restore deterrence. Instead, it risks producing the opposite result. Rather than isolating Iran, escalation is drawing its allied forces more tightly into the conflict. Rather than shortening the crisis, it is lengthening it. Rather than concentrating the battlefield, it is fragmenting it across the region. That is a dangerous trajectory, because a dispersed war is often harder to win than a concentrated one. It taxes logistics, political patience, alliance cohesion, and public confidence all at once.

What happens next will depend on whether the US and Israel continue to believe that greater military pressure can still produce strategic clarity. That belief now looks increasingly questionable. The longer the war continues without a decisive and stable outcome in Lebanon, the more confidence Hezbollah and its allies will gain. The more American assets are threatened in Iraq, the more difficult it becomes to present deeper intervention as manageable. The more Ansar Allah raises the cost of shipping through Bab el-Mandeb, the more the conflict escapes the boundaries of local war and enters the realm of global economic disruption.

The likely consequence is not a clean victory for any side, but a long phase of attritional regional instability. Israel may continue to intensify its campaign in Lebanon because it has not yet achieved the result it wants. Iraqi militias may continue attacking Western targets while preparing politically for a wider war. Ansar Allah may increase the use of maritime pressure because it understands that chokepoints can generate strategic effect far beyond Yemen itself. Iran, for its part, will keep trying to turn every enemy move into a trigger for wider overextension. It does not need to win in one dramatic moment. It only needs to ensure that its adversaries cannot close the conflict on their terms.

That is the central lesson of the present moment. Military superiority does not automatically translate into political success, especially in a region where allied non-state actors can open multiple fronts with relative flexibility. The US and Israel retain enormous destructive capacity. But destruction is not the same thing as control, and control is not the same thing as victory.

In that sense, the strategic initiative is no longer defined only by who can strike harder. It is increasingly defined by who can force the other side to fight on too many maps at once. Iran and the forces loyal to it appear determined to do exactly that. They are trying to stretch the conflict in time, to stretch it across geography, and to erode the ability of their adversaries to maintain focus. For now, that strategy is working far better than many in the US and Israel.

Murad Sadygzade is President of the Middle East Studies Center, Visiting Lecturer, HSE University (Moscow).

April 1, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Iran’s friends are about to make life much more difficult for Israel and the US

The war of liberation of the Arab and Islamic peoples expands across the Gulf

By Eduardo Vasco | Strategic Culture Foundation | April 1, 2026

Another country has joined the war against the United States and Israel: Iraq. Not officially, of course. The Iraqi state has not declared war on anyone, nor has it signaled direct participation in the conflict that began a month ago, when Washington and Tel Aviv began cowardly attacks against Iran.

But the Iraqi state is not particularly relevant for the purposes of this article. This is because, similarly to Lebanon, Iraq has lived for more than a decade under a kind of dual power: the state, represented by its institutions controlled by the ruling classes, the national bourgeoisie, large landowners, and bureaucrats aligned with the United States; and, on the other hand, an extremely powerful popular armed organization: the Popular Mobilization Forces.

At the same time that the Iraqi army was collapsing, the Shiite militias were fundamental in resisting the American occupation and in defeating the Islamic State nearly ten years ago—just as Hezbollah was responsible for expelling the Israeli army from Lebanon in 2006. And, like Hezbollah in Lebanon, the PMF gained enormous authority due to the role they played in the war of national liberation. Unlike Hezbollah, they are a united front of various organizations, but they are also Shiite—thus representing the most oppressed masses of the country—exist thanks to the coordination carried out by General Qassem Soleimani, and are to some extent integrated into the Iraqi state apparatus—part of them are paramilitary forces that obey the armed forces, and their political organs have representation in parliament and even in ministries.

This demonstrates the power of the PMF. The state was forced to integrate them into its structure in order to control them. However, what has been happening is that they are winning the hearts and minds of the military itself, thanks to their example of selflessness in the struggle against the enemies of the Iraqi people and the Arab and Islamic peoples: imperialism and Zionism.

Since the beginning of the genocidal war in Gaza and Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, their fighters have carried out a series of military actions against targets in Israel and American military bases in Iraq and Syria. American attacks against Iraqi militias—whether from outside, violating Iraq’s sovereignty, or from within, violating agreements with the government regarding troop presence—have strained relations between the Iraqi state and imperialism.

Although at first Iraqi institutions feared confronting the United States (for example, the judiciary ordered the arrest of those responsible for the attack on the Ayn al-Assad airbase in August 2024), the continuous disrespect by the U.S. toward the Iraqi people and territory forced authorities to change their position: government, parliament, and army began opposing the U.S. military presence. More than a shift in perspective, they were compelled to adopt this stance to avoid losing even more ground to the PMF, seen by the Iraqi people as the main bastion of the struggle for national sovereignty. The army, for example, could not remain passive while forces under its command were repeatedly attacked by a foreign power—the same power that invaded, destroyed, and subjugated the country for over a decade.

Thus, at the end of 2024, the Iraqi government and parliament approved the end of the international coalition imposed on Iraq by the United States under the pretext of fighting the Islamic State. Troops only left the federal unit in January 2026. Likewise, Iraq expelled the United Nations Assistance Mission, created in 2003 to help reorganize the country for imperialist exploitation.

In any case, U.S. and European imperialist troops continue to operate on Iraqi territory—at least 2,500 in the autonomous Kurdistan region—violating Iraq’s integrity and sovereignty. They are expected to leave by September, and Prime Minister Mohammed Shia al-Sudani has indicated to the press that they should depart even sooner. His argument is that an Iraq free of foreign troops would facilitate the disarmament of resistance groups, which would no longer have reason to remain armed—a balanced position, although it reveals the discomfort of the state bureaucracy and ruling class with an armed population, yet still more measured than that of the Lebanese government, which is attempting to forcibly disarm Hezbollah while effectively handing over the country’s territory to Israel. Sudani and his government have been struggling to control the PMF, even after last year’s reform aimed at reducing their autonomy.

After numerous violations by U.S. armed forces and proportional retaliation by the PMF, Iraqi authorities—certainly under overwhelming popular pressure—authorized all security forces in the country, including the PMF, to “act under the principle of the right of response and self-defense” against any attacks on their positions. The authorization came immediately after a U.S. bombing killed 15 fighters, including leaders, at PMF headquarters in Anbar province. The Iraqi Joint Operations Command directly blamed the U.S. and Israel for the strike.

This marks a turning point both for the Iraqi armed resistance and for the entire regional Axis of Resistance. The Iraqi state itself was forced to recognize the authority of the PMF, which now gains significant momentum. While they can increase their popularity among the masses and among lower and mid (or even higher) ranks of the state bureaucracy, they also bind the Iraqi state to defending the country—meaning a further shift toward a position opposing the United States and Israel.

According to the pro-U.S. outlet Alhurra, sources close to Prime Minister al-Sudani said he faced “internal pressure” to approve the pro-PMF measure and that the “majority voice” within the national security council supported it.

The most reactionary regimes in the Gulf understand the situation. The Jordanian monarchy, a vassal of imperialism and Zionism and an enemy of Iran and the Arab and Islamic peoples, called on Baghdad to follow the example of Lebanon’s puppet government and repudiate resistance actions. This appeal will not be heeded. It is already somewhat too late for that.

With the PMF joining the anti-imperialist war, the Axis of Resistance is significantly strengthened. In 2022, they had 230,000 members. It is very likely that this number has increased considerably. Likewise, with this endorsement from the Iraqi government, their popularity may grow even further and their ranks multiply. Thanks to Iranian support, their arsenal includes tanks, missiles, mortars, rockets, drones, and more.

The entry of the Iraqi resistance into the war also encourages other forces in the region. There are reports that Islamic resistance in Jordan has also attacked a U.S. base earlier this week, acting for the first time since the war began. Ansarallah, for its part, also officially announced its entry into the war last weekend.

What remains of the U.S. presence in Iraq had already been targeted by the PMF—for example, the Victory base in Baghdad and the Erbil airbase in Kurdistan. Even the U.S. diplomatic presence is under pressure: on the first day of the aggression, when the United States and Israel martyred Khamenei and 160 Iranian girls, a crowd attempted to storm Baghdad’s Green Zone, where major government buildings and Western embassies are located. It and the Al-Rashid Hotel in that protected zone were also struck by drones. In Erbil, at least one French soldier was killed and others injured in a resistance operation against the invaders.

Some organizations within the PMF also carried out attacks against American targets in Gulf countries governed by imperialist-backed regimes. The group Saraya Awliya al-Dam, responsible for some of these attacks, warned that any additional U.S. troop deployments to the Middle East “will compel us to intensify operations against the American presence in any country.”

Thanks to the PMF, imperialism was forced to end its official occupation of Iraq after years of destruction that began with the 2003 invasion. Thanks to them, the Islamic State—serving imperialist interests in the region—was defeated about ten years ago. Thanks to them, the Iraqi government imposed a withdrawal of U.S. and allied troops at the end of last year. And now, thanks to them, what remains of the imperialist presence in Iraq may be nearing its end.

This is a great service to the Iraqi people and to all peoples of the Middle East, as each American base destroyed or closed is a blow against imperialist presence in the region—a blow against the subjugation of those peoples. It is another step toward the definitive liberation of the Arab and Islamic peoples.

April 1, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , | Comments Off on The war of liberation of the Arab and Islamic peoples expands across the Gulf

Envoy warns UN on Trump’s threat to ‘obliterate’ Iran’s civilian infrastructure

Press TV – April 1, 2026

Iranian Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations Amir Saeid Iravani says US President Donald Trump’s threats to destroy Iran’s civilian infrastructure is a blatant violation of international law.

In a letter addressed to UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres and the president of the United Nations Security Council on Tuesday, Iravani drew the urgent attention of UN chief and the members of the Security Council “to yet another explicit and escalating threat issued by the President of the United States against the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

In a public social media post published on Monday, Trump openly threatened that should an agreement with Iran not be reached “shortly”, the US would “blow up and completely obliterate” Iran’s critical civilian infrastructure, including its electric generating plants, oil facilities, Kharg Island, a sea port for the export of up to 90% of Iran’s oil products, and all desalination facilities.

This follows his earlier threat on March 21 to “hit and obliterate” Iran’s power plants, “starting with the biggest one first.”

“The deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure … for the purposes of economic coercion, collective punishment, or with the intent to terrorize the civilian population, constitutes a serious violation of international humanitarian law and amounts to war crimes,” the letter said.

The letter called on the UN to unequivocally condemn these explicit threats, take all necessary measures to prevent the realization of such unlawful threats, and hold the US accountable for any consequences arising from such threats.

In response to deliberate and unlawful attacks on Iran’s civilian infrastructure, the letter said, the Islamic Republic of Iran reserves its inherent right of self-defense under Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations and will undertake all necessary and proportionate measures to fully safeguard its sovereignty, territorial integrity, and vital national interests.

In another letter to the UN on Tuesday, Iravani addressed US-Israeli strikes on UN offices in Tehran. “Iran strongly condemns these heinous and brutal attacks against the United Nations,” it said.

The letter called on Guterres to ensure the protection and inviolability of United Nations premises in all member states and formally and vigorously denounce the attacks.

The illegal US-Israeli aggression on Iran began on February 28 with airstrikes that assassinated senior Iranian officials and commanders.

The Iranian armed forces have responded by launching almost daily missile and drone operations targeting locations in the Israeli occupied territories as well as US military bases and assets across the region.

They have also blocked the strategic Strait of Hormuz to oil and gas tankers affiliated with the adversaries and those cooperating with them.

April 1, 2026 Posted by | War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Envoy warns UN on Trump’s threat to ‘obliterate’ Iran’s civilian infrastructure

‘Economic terrorism’: Steel facilities hit again in US-Israeli strike

Press TV – April 1, 2026

Isfahan’s Mobarakeh Steel Company says it has been attacked for a second time by the US-Israeli aggression.

In a statement released on Wednesday, the company said warplanes targeted a number of vital sections of its infrastructure at 23:00 p.m. local time Tuesday.

Initial assessments indicate the attack has caused significant damage to several parts of the company, the report said.

The enemy also targeted a subsidiary of Mobarakeh Steel Company called Sefid Dasht Steel Company in the southwestern Chaharmahal and Bakhtiari province.

Due to policies put in place after the previous attack on Thursday, only a small number of employees were present and just a few of them suffered minor injuries, according to the statement.

The Mobarakeh Steel Company is Iran’s largest steel producer and one of the biggest industrial complexes in West Asia and North Africa, playing a central role in the country’s steel industry.

In another attack on one of Iran’s most important industrial units, the Khuzestan Steel Company was also targeted on Friday, which caused damage to parts of its facilities.

Iran’s Human Rights Organization issued a statement on Wednesday, condemning the US-Israeli aggression’s “systematic strikes” against civilian infrastructure.

“These attacks are a blatant violation of international law and a form of economic terrorism and their goal is to put maximum pressure on Iran’s civilian population,” it said.

Factories, including steel plants, are the main livelihood of millions of Iranians and the aggression’s goal of destroying them is a clear violation of Geneva Conventions and a war crime.

The organization called on the international community to break its silence on the US-Israeli aggression war crimes against Iran’s populace and hold the enemy accountable for its violation of human rights.

The US and Israeli armed forces launched their military aggression against Iran in late February by attacking 30 targets across Tehran, assassinating Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei and several senior Iranian officials.

Since then, Iranian armed forces have retaliated swiftly by launching barrages of missiles and drones at Israeli‑occupied territories as well as US bases across the region.

Iranian officials say targeting US military bases in the region constitutes “legitimate self‑defense.”

Referring to Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, they say Iran has the legal right to defend itself against “acts of aggression” by the US or the Israeli regime.

April 1, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on ‘Economic terrorism’: Steel facilities hit again in US-Israeli strike

‘War Crime’: Iran condemns attacks on Arak, Ardakan nuclear sites

Press TV – April 1, 2026

Iran has condemned attacks on its nuclear facilities under the safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), calling such strikes a “war crime.”

The warning from the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) on Wednesday comes days after a military assault as part of the US-Israeli terrorist war on the Islamic Republic on two nuclear sites in Arak and Ardakan.

Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokesman for the AEOI, said that attacking nuclear facilities under IAEA oversight is inconsistent with international principles and constitutes an international offense, even against a heavy water complex.

The Khondab heavy water complex in Arak was targeted for a second time, following an earlier attack during the 12-day war last June. On the same day, Iranian authorities reported that a yellowcake production facility in Ardakan, in the central province of Yazd, was also struck.

“Attacking nuclear facilities that are under IAEA safeguards is totally inconsistent with international principles and such an international offense, even against a heavy water complex, is definitely a war crime,” Kamalvandi stressed.

Kamalvandi said Iran has legally documented the incidents and is consulting both domestic and international legal experts. He said the matter would be pursued through the country’s Foreign Ministry and the office of the vice president for legal affairs.

He also stressed that despite these attacks, Iran’s nuclear knowledge and capabilities cannot be destroyed. “The enemy will definitely fail to obliterate Iran’s nuclear knowledge through these attacks.”

Iran has repeatedly stated that its nuclear program is peaceful and conducted under strict international supervision. The country maintains that any strike on safeguarded nuclear sites is a violation of international law, undermining global agreements on nuclear safety and protection.

April 1, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, War Crimes, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on ‘War Crime’: Iran condemns attacks on Arak, Ardakan nuclear sites

Two-thirds of Americans want quick end to Iran war even if goals unmet

Al Mayadeen | April 1, 2026

Two-thirds of Americans believe the United States should work to end its involvement in the Iran war on Iran quickly, even if that means not achieving the goals set out by the Trump administration, a Reuters/Ipsos poll has found.

Some 66 percent of respondents to the poll, conducted March 28-30, voiced that view, while 27 percent said the US should work to achieve all its goals in Iran, even if the war goes on for an extended period. Six percent did not answer the question.

Republican support for the war softens

Among Trump’s Republicans, 40 percent supported ending the war quickly even if it did not achieve US goals, while 57 percent supported a longer involvement, a significant split within the president’s own party as the war enters its sixth week.

The month-long war has spread across West Asia, killing thousands of people and hitting the global economy with soaring energy prices, fueling inflation fears worldwide.

A total of 60 percent of respondents said they disapproved of US military strikes on Iran, while 35 percent approved.

Gas prices weigh on voters

One of the war’s most visible effects in the US has been the rising cost of gasoline, which rose above $4 a gallon on Monday for the first time in more than three years, data from price tracking service GasBuddy showed.

Two in three respondents said they expected gas prices to worsen over the next year, including 40 percent of Republicans.

More than half of respondents thought the war would have a mostly negative impact on their personal financial situation, including 39 percent of Republicans.

A political liability

Trump’s Republicans face voters in November for midterm elections that will decide whether they can hold onto slim majorities in the House and Senate. The incumbent president’s party tends to lose seats in Congress in midterm elections, and the war has emerged as a growing political liability.

The poll reflects a sobering reality for an administration that launched the war on February 28 with promises of a swift victory. Five weeks later, the war has achieved none of its stated objectives. Iran has not collapsed. The Strait of Hormuz remains closed. US troops remain deployed. And now, even the president’s own supporters are showing signs of fatigue.

For the average American, the war is now being felt at the gas pump, in monthly bills, and in the growing sense that a war sold as quick and decisive has become yet another endless entanglement. As the November midterms approach, the Republican Party may find that the cost of war is not measured only in dollars and casualties, but in votes.

The question for Trump and his party is whether they can convince an exhausted electorate to keep funding a war that even many of their own supporters now want to end.

Beyond the polls: Draft fears and military dissent

The public opposition reflected in the Reuters/Ipsos poll is mirrored by growing anxiety inside the United States about where the war is headed. Speculation about a possible military draft has surfaced as Trump continues his war against Iran, even though officials emphasize that no draft is planned, The Guardian reported.

In recent weeks, Trump deployed marines and army paratroopers to West Asia, signaling a potential ground operation to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. The provocative military activity has prompted discussions about what it would take to invade a country larger than Iraq, intensifying fears about a draft.

The White House has offered little clarity to quell speculation. On March 8, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt responded to a question about a possible draft by saying, “The president, as commander-in-chief, wants to continue to assess the success of this military operation. It’s not part of the current plan right now, but the president, again, wisely keeps his options on table.”

Her inconclusive answer caused debate to snowball, prompting news outlets to explain how a draft might work. Social media users reacted to administrative changes in the Selective Service program, while satirical campaigns like DraftBarronTrump.com mocked Trump’s willingness to send others to war while avoiding military service for his own son. The hashtag #SendBarron trended on X and TikTok in early March.

Troops turning against the war

Beyond civilian anxiety, dissent is spreading within the military itself. Since early March, doubts have spread among US troops over Washington’s ongoing war on Iran, with growing concern about the war’s objectives, rising casualties, and the possibility of a ground invasion.

A military official involved in treating evacuated troops said forces are facing “inadequate protection and planning,” highlighting the toll of repeated Iranian missile and drone strikes on US bases. At least 13 US troops have been killed and more than 230 wounded since the start of the war, according to US officials cited in the report, while Iranian authorities put the number of fatalities in the hundreds.

Concerns have also intensified over the possibility of a US ground invasion in Iran, which some military personnel described as lacking clear planning. “A ground invasion would be an absolute disaster… we don’t have a plan for that,” one official said, adding that the US cannot even “fully defend a single land base in the theater.”

Some troops have voiced opposition to the political motivations behind the war. One reservist reported hearing service members say, “We do not want to die for Israel — we don’t want to be political pawns.”

Advocacy groups supporting military personnel reported a sharp rise in inquiries about conscientious objector status, with some organizations noting a dramatic increase in requests since the war began. Experts warn that growing dissatisfaction within the military could impact the effectiveness of the campaign and signal deeper shifts in attitudes toward US military interventions abroad.

The gap between Washington’s war aims and the willingness of both the American public and its own troops to sustain them is becoming impossible to ignore. The polls show a public that wants out. The streets and social media show a population bracing for escalation. And inside the military, the soldiers who would be asked to fight are beginning to ask why.

April 1, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Two-thirds of Americans want quick end to Iran war even if goals unmet

Trump to Give “Important Update on Iran” Wednesday in Prime-Time Speech

By Larry C. Johnson – SONAR – April 1, 2026

What is Donald Trump going to say about Iran on Wednesday night? Before I layout three possible outcomes, let’s examine what Trump is actually doing in terms of some key military assets (all of this is from open source reporting).

A-10 Squadron (Confirmed New Deployment)

Since Friday, March 27, 2026, the most prominently reported new US air asset movement to the Middle East (CENTCOM area of responsibility) has been a squadron-sized deployment of A-10C Thunderbolt II attack aircraft (Warthogs). Six A-10s from the Idaho Air National Guard’s 190th Fighter Squadron arrived at Pease Air National Guard Base (New Hampshire) as part of staging. On March 30, twelve A-10s from the Michigan Air National Guard’s 107th Fighter Squadron (Selfridge ANGB) departed Pease for RAF Lakenheath, UK (a common transit stop), in two flights of six. Another six followed on March 31. These ~12–18 aircraft are en route to the Middle East to reinforce or nearly double the existing A-10 presence there.

A-10s are already operating in theater (e.g., from the 75th Expeditionary Fighter Squadron) for close air support, anti-boat strikes in the Strait of Hormuz, drone interdiction, and coastal targeting. The surge supports intensified low-altitude operations against Iranian “mosquito fleet” vessels, mines, and remnants amid the broader campaign.

Apache Helicopters (AH-64) Squadron

US Central Command publicly confirmed the operational use of AH-64 Apache attack helicopters in late March (updates around March 16–18 and a specific confirmation on March 26). The 6-17th Air Cavalry Squadron (part of the 4th Infantry Division Combat Aviation Brigade, operating AH-64D/E variants) is the unit involved. It had been forward-deployed earlier (under prior rotations like Operation Inherent Resolve) but was newly integrated into Epic Fury strikes against Iranian boats, drones, and coastal targets in the southern flank/Hormuz area.

Several viral Facebook posts and YouTube videos (from accounts like “MovieFans.Lich,” “Live WWIIIRE,” and similar sensationalist pages) claim a “massive C-17 fleet” is deploying Apache helicopter squadrons alongside troops, armored vehicles, and equipment. These describe “dozens” or “over 112 C-17s” streaming into the region, with Apaches highlighted for their anti-armor, close air support, and anti-boat roles in rugged coastal terrain. Some videos include generic footage of folded Apaches inside C-17 cargo bays or all-female flight crews turning around quickly.

Posts from OSINT-focused X accounts (e.g., @TheIntelFrog, @Faytuks, @JewishWarrior13) detail dozens of C-17 flights since mid-March (e.g., ~35–50 flights tracked from March 12–24, with more ongoing) originating from bases like Fort Bragg/Pope AAF, Fort Campbell, Hunter AAF, and McChord AFB. Destinations include Ovda (Israel), Jordanian bases (King Faisal, King Hussein), and other CENTCOM hubs. These are linked to troop surges (including elements of the 82nd Airborne) and special operations forces, with some users speculating or claiming that attack helicopters like Apaches are part of the heavy equipment being airlifted. One analysis noted origins tied to units with aviation assets, such as the 160th SOAR (which operates helicopters, though primarily MH-6/ MH-60 rather than AH-64).

The new deployment of these assets are consistent with a military option that involves close-air support and/or attacks on Iranian fast boats and water drones.

So what is Trump going to announce?

Option 1 — Declare that negotiations with Iran via intermediaries (e.g., Pakistan) are progressing and that the United States is going to cease combat operations against Iran in order to support the negotiations and achieve a peaceful resolution.

Option 2 — Declare that victory has been achieved and that US forces will begin withdrawing from the region, leaving the status of the Strait of Hormuz in limbo.

Option 3 — Announce a massive air and ground operation to secure the freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.

The deployment of the A-10s and the Apaches can only mean one of two things:

  1. It is a show of force intended to pressure Iran to return to the negotiating table.
  2. The US is going to launch a massive attack against Iranian assets in the Persian Gulf, especially those located in and around the Strait of Hormuz.

Since Monday, March 30, 2026, President Donald Trump has made several public comments on the ongoing US-led Operation Epic Fury against Iran, primarily via Truth Social posts, interviews (including with the New York Post ), and remarks to reporters. His statements emphasize US military successes, threats of further escalation if demands are unmet, criticism of allies, and a potential near-term wind-down of direct US involvement.

On Monday, Trump described Iran as effectively “decimated” or “obliterated,” with its air force, navy, and many ships sunk or destroyed. He portrayed the campaign as highly successful and “way ahead of schedule” in prior context, but continued highlighting strikes on “long-sought-after targets.” He shared video footage on Truth Social of a massive explosion and secondary blasts in Isfahan (linked to strikes on uranium-related or military sites), without additional caption in one instance.

Trump also posted that the US was in “serious discussions with a new, and more reasonable, regime” to end operations. He warned that if the Strait of Hormuz is not “immediately ‘Open for Business’” and a deal is not reached shortly, the US would “completely obliterate” Iran’s electric generating plants, oil wells, Kharg Island, and possibly desalination plants. He framed this as concluding the US “lovely ‘stay’ in Iran.” In follow-up comments, he suggested the US could respond to Iranian actions “twenty times harder” with “Death, Fire, and Fury.”

Overall, Trump’s messaging since March 30 combines triumphalism about US achievements, escalatory warnings tied to the Strait of Hormuz and energy targets, frustration with allies, and signals of de-escalation with a short timeline for reduced US involvement. These comments have influenced market reactions (e.g., oil prices and equities) and drawn responses from Iranian officials and international observers.

Trump’s remarks since Monday have boosted the confidence of the folks on Wall Street and contributed to a significant surge in the stock market, with the Dow up 1,125 points. The price for BRENT oil dropped from 118 to 103 during Tuesday trading. This means the financial folks believe the war is going to end.

I think Trump is counting on Iran offering up some concessions in the face of the US buildup of additional air combat assets. Netanyahu reportedly just said Iran no longer poses a threat to Israel’s existence… A dramatic pivot if true. However, over the last few hours, Israel and the US carried out a large wave of attacks across Iran. They struck targets across several parts of Tehran, as well as in the cities of Karaj, Shahriar, Ahvaz, Shiraz, Abadeh, Isfahan, and Bandar Abbas. Iran will retaliate in force to these latest attacks.

In short, I believe Donald Trump will announce a major offensive to try to force Iran to release its chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz… I believe that offensive will fail and that the war will escalate unless the US and Israel agree to two critical Iranian demands: the end of all sanctions and the removal of US military bases from the Persian Gulf arab countries.

Russia and China are two wild cards that could change the trajectory of the current war. If they engage and apply pressure on the diplomatic front — including ironclad security guarantees to Iran — Donald Trump may take the exit ramp.

What do you think?

Pascal Lottaz and I discussed the current situation in the Persian Gulf:

Video Link

I did my usual Tuesday chat with Marcello:

Video Link

A new interview with Rathbone. Interesting fellow… He’s also a comedian:


Video Link

April 1, 2026 Posted by | Militarism, Video, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Trump to Give “Important Update on Iran” Wednesday in Prime-Time Speech

Iran To Target Military Industrial-Tech Complex That Facilitated Gaza Genocide

The Dissident | March 31, 2026

The Iranian IRCG has put out a statement threatening to target the facilities of companies in the Middle East which are part of America’s war profiteering machine, primarily the tech companies.

In a statement, the IRCG said, “Our repeated warnings about the necessity to stop terrorist operations were ignored, and today, following your terrorist attacks and those of your Israeli allies, several Iranian citizens were martyred” adding, “Since the main element in designing and tracking assassination targets are American ICT and AI companies, in response to these crimes, from now on the main and effective institutions involved in terrorist operations will be our legitimate targets” and “We advise the employees of these institutions to immediately leave their workplaces to preserve their lives. Also, residents of areas around these terrorist companies in all countries of the region, within a one-kilometre radius, should leave their homes and workplaces and seek safe places”.

The list of targeted companies included:

Cisco
HP
Intel
Oracle
Microsoft
Apple
Google
Meta
IBM
Dell
Palantir
Nvidia
J.P. Morgan
Tesla
GE (General Electric)
Spire Solutions
G42
Boeing

All of these companies play an integral role in the U.S./Israeli war machine in the Middle East and have been needed to facilitate not only the war in Iran but the genocide in Gaza.

The United Nations’ Special Rapporteur for Palestine, Francesca Albanese, meticulously documented many of these companies’ crucial role in facilitating the U.S.-backed Israeli genocide in Gaza.

The following is the role each of these companies played in the genocide in Gaza as documented by Albanese.

HP

Albanese documented that, “Hewlett Packard Enterprises (HPE) maintained the database and its Israeli subsidiary is still providing servers. Hewlett Packard (HP) has long enabled the apartheid systems of Israel, supplying technology to the Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT), the prison service and police.Since the 2015 split of the company into Hewlett Packard Enterprises and HP Inc., opaque business structures have obscured the roles of their seven remaining Israeli subsidiaries”.

Microsoft

Albanese documented that, “Microsoft has been active in Israel since 1991, developing its largest centre outside the United States. Its technologies are embedded in the prison service, police, universities and schools – including in colonies. Microsoft has been integrating its systems and civilian tech across the Israeli military since 2003, while acquiring Israeli cybersecurity and surveillance start-ups.”

She added that Microsoft, “grant Israel virtually government-wide access to their cloud and artificial intelligence technologies, enhancing data processing, decision-making and surveillance and analysis capacities” adding that, “Microsoft, with its Azure platform, and the Project Nimbus consortium stepped in with critical cloud and artificial intelligence infrastructure. Their Israel-located servers ensure data sovereignty and a shield from accountability, under favourable contracts offering minimal restrictions or oversight. In July 2024, an Israeli colonel described cloud tech as a weapon in every sense of the word”

Google

Albanese documented that, “As Israeli apartheid, military and population-control systems generate increasing volumes of data, its reliance on cloud storage and computing has grown. In 2021, Israel awarded Alphabet Inc. (Google) … a $1.2 billion contract (Project Nimbus) largely funded through Ministry of Defense expenditure to provide core tech infrastructure.”

IBM

Albanese documented that, “IBM has operated in Israel since 1972, training military and intelligence personnel – especially from Unit 8200 – for the technology sector and start-up scene. Since 2019, IBM Israel has operated and upgraded the central database of the Population and Immigration Authority, enabling collection, storage and governmental use of biometric data on Palestinians, and supporting the discriminatory permit regime of Israel.”

Palantir

Albanese documented that, “The Israeli military has developed artificial intelligence systems, such as ‘Lavender’, ‘Gospel’ and ‘Where’s Daddy?’ to process data and generate lists of targets, reshaping modern warfare and illustrating the dual-use nature of artificial intelligence. Palantir Technologies Inc., whose tech collaboration with Israel long predates October 2023, expanded its support to the Israeli military post-October 2023. There are reasonable grounds to believe Palantir has provided automatic predictive policing technology, core defence infrastructure for rapid and scaled-up construction and deployment of military software, and its Artificial Intelligence Platform, which allows real-time battlefield data integration for automated decision-making. In January 2024, Palantir announced a new strategic partnership with Israel and held a board meeting in Tel Aviv ‘in solidarity’; in April 2025, Palantir’s Chief Executive Officer responded to accusations that Palantir had killed Palestinians in Gaza by saying, ‘mostly terrorists, that’s true’. Both incidents are indicative of executive-level knowledge and purpose vis-à-vis the unlawful use of force by Israel, and failure to prevent such acts or withdraw involvement.”

The biography “The Philosopher in the Valley: Alex Karp, Palantir, and the Rise of the Surveillance State” of Palantir’s co-founder Alex Karp revealed that “The company’s technology was deployed by the Israelis during military operations in Lebanon in 2024 that decimated Hezbollah’s top leadership” as well as “Operation Grim Beeper, in which hundreds of Hezbollah fighters were injured and maimed when their pagers and walkie-talkies exploded” adding that, “Its software was used by the Israeli military in several raids in Gaza”.

Other Companies Role In The Genocide

Other companies on Iran’s target list played an integral war in the Gaza genocide as well.

  • Journalist Alan Macleod reported that , “While Oracle has signed multiple lucrative contracts with the Israeli national security state” its owner, Larry “Ellison himself has personally bankrolled the Israeli Defense Forces, giving tens of millions of dollars to the Friends of the IDF, an organization that purchases equipment for the Israeli military. This included a $16.6 million pledge (the largest single donation the group has received) to build a new training facility for soldiers defending what he called ‘our home.’” He added that, “Oracle sees itself as an activist organization, one whose goal is the advancement of the Israeli colonization project. Safra Catz, the company’s Israeli-American CEO, bluntly explained that any employees uncomfortable with supporting a genocide should simply quit.”
  • Analyst Murad Jandali documented that , “Apple has close relations with ‘Israel’ and supports it on several levels, as Apple has its own research and development institution in the occupied Palestinian territories, specifically in northern Tel Aviv” adding, “It is noteworthy that last October, Google, Apple, and Waze had disabled live traffic updates for the areas of ‘Israel’ and the Gaza Strip at the request of the Israeli army, prior to the start of the military operation in the Strip, according to Bloomberg.”
  • The Netherlands-based financial research group Profundo uncovered that “a small number of investment banks have played a crucial role in helping Israel meet the ‘significant funding needs’ arising from its war on Gaza by providing significant underwriting services to the Israeli state” and that “The research finds that Israel issued sovereign bonds between October 7th, 2023 and January 2025 with a total value of $19.4 billion and reveals the seven banks that underwrote these bonds for the Israeli state” one of which was JP Morgan Chase.
  • Leaked documents from the Zionist Tony Blair Institute included plans to turn Gaza into an “‘Elon Musk Smart Manufacturing Zone’ on the Gaza-Israel border where US electric vehicle companies (like Tesla) would build cars for export to Europe” after the end of the Gaza genocide.
  • In December of last year , “the U.S. government awarded Boeing a contract with a ceiling of $8.58 Billion for what the Pentagon describes as the ‘F-15 Israel Program.’ The contract covers the design, integration, instrumentation, test, production, and delivery of 25 new F-15IA aircraft for the Israeli Air Force, with an option for an additional 25 aircraft.”
  • The BDS movement has noted that “Cisco’s complicity in Israel’s crimes of apartheid and genocide is well documented through its illegal operations in illegal settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT), discriminatory policies, long-standing partnership with the Israeli military, and serial acquisitions of Israeli companies complicit in human rights violations. Cisco knowingly provides Israel with technology that is deployed in its grave human rights violations, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.”

The tech companies have also been integral in the U.S. war on Iran. As Responsible Statecraft noted , “the U.S. military has employed Palantir’s Maven, which uses AI to classify targets and recommend weapons systems for strikes. Anthropic’s Claude is embedded in Maven’s system, helping prioritise targets and draft automated legal justifications for each strike.”

Through targeting the U.S. military industrial tech complex, Iran is not only responding against the infrastructure that fuels the Iran war, but the infrastructure fuelling the Israeli genocide in Gaza and repression of Palestinians across Gaza and the West Bank.

March 31, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Wars for Israel | , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Iran To Target Military Industrial-Tech Complex That Facilitated Gaza Genocide

Collapsing Empire: The Resistance Disarms ‘Israel’

By Kit Klarenberg | Al Mayadeen | March 31, 2026

As the criminal Zionist-American war on Iran enters its second month, the conflict has proven so ruinous for the aggressors that dire alarm is being widely sounded. Embarrassing failure to subdue the Islamic Republic from the air has raised the prospect of a US ground operation of some kind, widely perceived as a suicide mission. Washington has also burned through over 850 Tomahawk missiles and 1,000 air-defense interceptors, at a rate the Pentagon finds “alarming”. In the process, “Israel” is rapidly approaching total disarmament.

On March 24th, elite British state-connected ‘think tank’ RUSI published a withering post mortem of the war’s first 16 days. An in-house “ledger tool” tracking the “intense consumption of advanced munitions” by the US and Zionist entity calculates 11,294 fires over this period, which cost a total of approximately $26 billion to produce. Resultantly, US – and thus Israeli – inventories of long-range interceptions and precision strike weapons “are nearing exhaustion.” And it will perhaps cost double that staggering amount to replenish what has been lost.

The Resistance shows no signs of slowing its onslaught, with every indication Tehran’s munitions production continues apace in wartime. Even the Western media has acknowledged Iran’s drone and missile arsenal costs a fraction to produce of the past and future outlay involved in shooting them down. Per RUSI, the war on Iran has exposed a “critical vulnerability” at the core of the Empire’s warfighting capabilities: a “strategically ruinous cost-exchange ratio that the West’s industrial capacity is not prepared to sustain.”

Over a dozen different munitions were fired by the US and “Israel” over the conflict’s first 16 days, “at a rate that appears to be unsustainable.” Now, Tehran’s relentless barrage “continues to drain the coalition’s most critical assets” – RUSI calculates missile and drone attacks have averaged 33 and 94 strikes daily, on average. By contrast, the organisation’s analysis shows “the magazine abyss” for Washington and Tel Aviv is “coming soon”. Moreover, Rheinmetall’s CEO has cautioned the Empire’s global munitions stockpiles are “empty or nearly empty.”

The Zionist-American war on Iran has thus become “a contest of endurance,” in which “the decisive advantage shifts to the actor that can sustain its defensive economy and replenish its most critical assets.” Based on current battle trends, the Islamic Republic firmly holds that advantage, and will continue to do so. The US could be mere weeks away from running out of ground-attack missiles – including much-vaunted ATACMS – and THAAD interceptors. RUSI similarly forecasts “Israel’s” Arrow interceptors will “likely” be “completely expended” come April.

On top of enormous expense, even at pre-war production levels, it would take years to replace what was spent in just over two weeks against Iran. As this journalist documented on March 24th, Tehran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz has thrown the Empire’s already shattered defence industrial base into total disarray. Commodities and components central to constructing and maintaining digital and electronic systems, and precision-guided munitions, which hitherto transited the Strait daily in abundance, are now scarcer and ever-rising in cost.

‘Constant Alert’

Iran has not only overwhelmed and disarmed the Zionist entity and imperial targets throughout West Asia via systematic, staggered blitzes of drones and missiles. Crippling at least 12 US and allied radars and satellite terminals throughout the region has dented interception rates far further, while increasing the number of munitions necessary to shoot down the latest barrage blasted from Tehran – often unsuccessfully. Up to 11 Patriot interceptors can be fired at an Iranian missile, and up to eight at a single drone.

As a March 26th report by highly influential Zionist ‘think tank’ JINSA observes, “Iran’s attacks have imposed mounting costs on every component of the defensive architecture.” The Islamic Republic entered the conflict “with a deliberate plan to degrade US and [allied] capabilities by attacking each element of their air defense architectures.” In the process, “some of the most capable and expensive sensors” in Washington’s global inventory have been destroyed, with little chance of near-term repair.

These sensors in many cases explicitly provide the Zionist entity with an “early warning” system, tearing a gaping and ever-widening hole in Tel Aviv’s detection and warning network. As such, Iranian drone swarms – “frequently drawing on Russian tactical innovations from the Ukraine war” – are routinely proving “far harder to detect and defeat” than missiles, hitting twice the number of targets with pinpoint accuracy. Some US sensor systems simply cannot detect low-altitude Shahed volleys – including those specifically designed to counter drones.

It is not just Shaheds that have wreaked havoc. The entire Resistance is increasingly deploying fiber-optic guided drones “immune to electronic warfare jamming,” and first-person-view drones “for precision strikes against point targets,” JINSA reports. Other Iranian drones are equipped with jet engines, making them significantly faster than Shaheds, and interception even more problematic. As the conflict evolves too, Tehran has increasingly relied on ballistic missiles carrying cluster warheads, which release up to 80 submunitions at high altitude that scatter across areas spanning several miles.

JINSA assesses over half of the total Iranian missiles fired during this conflict to date carried cluster warheads, compared with three known uses during the calamitous 12 Day War. “Even a successful intercept does not guarantee the bomblets are stopped” – if interceptors fail to strike these missiles before they reenter the Earth’s atmosphere, they still disperse submunitions in the air, or release them upon impact. These attacks don’t deliberately target Israeli civilians, but nonetheless make daily life miserable for the settler colony’s population:

“Smaller, more frequent Iranian salvos keep civilian populations under constant alert…[This] shortens the time between attacks while reducing overall lethality, trading mass effect for persistence to wear down daily life. Warheads with cluster munitions amplify these disruptions by increasing the chance that submunitions or debris fall in populated areas…”Israel’s” decision not to fire against all incoming ballistic missiles carrying cluster munitions also suggests a need to ration interceptors.”

‘Highly Capable’

However, the Resistance is predominantly concerned with fulfilling its “deliberate plan to degrade” US and Israeli defensive capabilities, to drive the former out of West Asia permanently and make the region safe for Palestine’s final liberation. On this score, JINSA notes the “devastating effects” of Iran’s drones and missile barrages on previously invulnerable targets. For example, the Pentagon estimates a single Resistance strike on the US Navy Fifth Fleet headquarters in Bahrain cost approximately $200 million.

It’s one of over a dozen US bases in the Gulf to sustain “significant damage.” Fighter jets have been destroyed, American soldiers injured and killed in sizeable numbers, and survivors sent scurrying to local hotels. Iran has resolved to target these makeshift, remote bases. Local air defense batteries are thoroughly preoccupied with “sufficiently defending” devastated US military installations, “to create the conditions for additional assets and repair teams to flow into theater.”

When they will arrive, how long they will take to restore what has been lost, and whether doing so will be remotely safe, remains to be seen. Meanwhile, “Iranian fire against shipping in the Gulf has proven even harder to stop than attacks on land targets.” Over half of known Resistance projectiles fired at vessels in the Gulf and Strait of Hormuz have hit their targets. With Gulf governments having depleted almost their entire interceptor stocks since February 28th, what comes next could be catastrophic:

“Most Gulf bases, ports, and cities sit only a short distance from Iranian launch areas, which reduces the time defenders have to detect, track, and engage incoming threats. Iranian ballistic missiles launched toward Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, or the UAE can reach their targets within three to 10 minutes, a fraction of the already short 12 – 15 minutes that ballistic missiles take to reach Israel.”

To say the least, from the Empire’s perspective, none of this should be happening. The Zionist-American war on Iran was intended to be a one-sided aerial gangbeating lasting only a few days, which would culminate with the Islamic Republic’s collapse, or at least total capitulation. There was seemingly no sense in Washington, Tel Aviv, or other imperial centres of power that Tehran could fight back at all, let alone bring America’s military machine to its knees.

Yet, the inevitable upshot of kickstarting a major conflict with the Resistance was entirely predictable, and indeed widely predicted. None other than JINSA released an assessment in September 2024 warning how Iran had developed a “large and highly capable missile and drone force,” designed to render US bases in West Asia “unuseable” and “overwhelm” air defences. JINSA acknowledged this capacity posed a dire threat to the Zionist entity – but argued “Israel” simply required enhanced missile interceptors to counter the menace.

That appraisal was authored by former CENTCOM commander Frank McKenzie, who oversaw the Empire’s disastrous retreat from Afghanistan. On March 20th, he openly boasted how the war on Iran was unfolding according to a strategy drawn up by CENTCOM over “many years”, and “my fingerprints are on this war plan.” McKenzie’s failure to take known threats seriously, and delusional belief in the ultimate invincibility – and inexhaustibility – of US and Israeli air defences, surely accounts for the conflict rebounding so spectacularly against the aggressors.

JINSA’s latest report is likewise rife with fantastical optimism. It argues Iran can be defeated by the Empire pressuring its vassals to move their US-supplied air defences to the Gulf, forming a coalition with “partners” in Europe and West Asia “to escort shipping through the Strait of Hormuz,” and other hallucinatory plots. In a bitter irony, on March 5th, the report’s author cheered how “Iran’s missile firepower has almost run out.” Will the Zionist entity’s very real disarmament even be noticed by imperial strategists?

March 31, 2026 Posted by | Ethnic Cleansing, Racism, Zionism, Militarism, Wars for Israel | , , , , | Comments Off on Collapsing Empire: The Resistance Disarms ‘Israel’

Rethinking America’s greatest threat: Iran vs. Israel-Firsters

By Jamal Kanj | MEMO | March 31, 2026

I filled my car tank this week and paid 40% more than I did just a month ago. That isn’t just an economic abstraction, but another indirect Israeli “surcharge” on American consumers. Meanwhile, Donald Trump spends another getaway weekend at his Mar-a-Lago golf course, a trip subsidized by the same taxpayers who are forced to choose between feeding their families or fueling their cars.

Trump’s campaign rhetoric against foreign wars had resonated with American voters who wanted their government to prioritize domestic economy over foreign intervention. He built his movement by criticizing past administrations, Republican and Democrat, for squandering American blood and money abroad. Nevertheless, here we are again: record-high gas prices at home, and thousands of miles away, American soldiers are once again in harm’s way, drawn into another made-for-Israel war.

“Drill, baby, drill,” Trump promised to lower oil prices. Reality, however, tells a different story. The U.S. is producing more oil than ever, and consumers are paying as never before. Why? Because “drill, baby, drill” was never about lowering prices, it was about maximizing profits.

During the 1973 oil crisis, the American Israeli-managed media blamed the higher prices on Arab “greed,” often resorting to racist and derogatory stereotypes. Today, U.S. companies produce enough oil to meet or exceed domestic consumptions, yet tax-subsidized oil corporations keep prices at record highs. Suddenly, it isn’t “greed” anymore, or “towelheads,” it’s just “market” prices. This is while Trump continues to claim that the U.S. is not impacted by oil moving through the Strait of Hormuz.

If so, what exactly is driving prices? If it’s neither production costs nor a supply-and-demand imbalance, then what is it? Profiteering from international crises 7,000 miles away. What’s the value of “drill, baby, drill” and boasting about “oil independence’” if American consumers pay international crisis prices for oil extracted from America’s backyard? The reality is a bitter irony: U.S. taxpayers subsidize the production of oil, but still pay a war premium “market” price.

None of this should come as a surprise. It is part of being dragged into a war planned in Tel Aviv, promoted by “Israel-first” loyalists in Washington, and disconnected from America’s national interest. It is the geopolitical equivalent of a reckless spender charging a credit card with no intention of footing the bill. The proxy dictates the strategy, while the American public is left to pay for the fallout.

It is a lopsided relationship, because in Washington, access is about money not representation. Israel-first policies are not discussed in town halls, but planned behind closed doors in donor circles. Take for instance, the late Sheldon Adelson who bought Trump’s policies: moving the U.S. embassy to occupied Jerusalem, and the illegal recognition of Israeli theft of the Syrian Golan Heights. Today, his widow, the Israeli/American, Miriam Adelson is pushing for wars on behalf of the country she “loves more” than America.

Trump promised to put “America First,” in actuality, it is Israel-first donor’s agenda: billionaires like Larry Ellison, Bill Ackman, Alex Karp, Miriam Adelson, Haim Saban, Michael Dell ,,, etc. Their Israel-first wish list, supersedes America First.

The contradiction becomes even sharper when rhetoric is measured against action. As a presidential candidate, Donald Trump repeatedly attacked Joe Biden for funding military support to help Ukraine fight its own war. Yet as president, he is now asking Congress to add $200 billion to an already swelling deficit and conscripting American soldiers to fight on behalf of another country. And to pay for it, Republican leadership is considering billing the American patient through cuts to domestic healthcare.

It’s beyond comprehension. Republicans suddenly discover their “fiscal conscience” willing to defund the health of their own citizens, when they can pay for it, at least in part, by trimming the massive annual aid to Israel and its military industrial complex.

Trump’s hypocrisy, falsehoods, and relentless projection are no longer just personal or political quirks, they have become normalized in Washington. For him, projection functions as a survival mechanism: attacking others to mask his own inadequacies. The ironies are as consistent as they are galling: Trump once mocked Barack Obama for playing too much golf, when he spends his weekends—even in a time of war—on his own greens. He branded Joe Biden as ‘Sleepy Joe,’ when it is Trump who now drifts off during high-stakes briefings and meetings. He does not merely criticize his opponents; he projects his own deficiencies onto them, displacing his reality to escape accountability.

Recent hyperbolic statements underscore those concerns. In five consecutive days, Donald Trump fired off at five shifting positions regarding the Strait of Hormuz. A frantic confusion that signals a policy sinking deeper into a foreign quagmire. This is the definition of a failed command: objectives that mutate by the hour, missions that expand without clarity, under a stewardship that reacts instead of leading.

Amid this uncertainty, Americans are justified in asking fundamental questions. Why is Trump hell-bent on attacking Iran, a country under the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) oversight, its program has been repeatedly certified as civilian, while Israel is permitted to maintain a secret nuclear arsenal, no IAEA supervision, and with zero accountability? Why would Washington demand absolute transparency from Tehran while enabling the total opacity of Tel Aviv.

Even more critical, how is a nuclear-armed Iran, equipped with a delivery mechanism, a credible threat to the U.S.? By what logic would it pose more of a risk than the nuclear arsenals of North Korea, China, or Russia? How does Iran rise above these in the hierarchy of existential risks? It does not, because this is less about the U.S. than it is about Israel.

America’s greatest threat is not Iran’s nuclear technology, it is rather the undue influence of Israeli firsters embedded in the U.S. media, Congress and the White House steering an Israel-first agenda that leverages American credibility, and channels U.S. resources to serve Israeli endless wars.

March 31, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Wars for Israel | , , , | Comments Off on Rethinking America’s greatest threat: Iran vs. Israel-Firsters

No Threat Can Force Iran’s Surrender /Trita Parsi & Lt Cl Daniel Davis

Daniel Davis / Deep Dive – March 30, 2026

March 31, 2026 Posted by | Economics, Militarism, Video, Wars for Israel | , , | Comments Off on No Threat Can Force Iran’s Surrender /Trita Parsi & Lt Cl Daniel Davis

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »