The US and Israel started a war against Iran and decapitated it. What will be the consequences?

14 313 184
The US and Israel started a war against Iran and decapitated it. What will be the consequences?

On February 28, the United States and Israel launched a large-scale military operation against Iran, which the Americans called "epic fury" and the Israelis called "the roar of a lion." The operation began with massive aerial bombing and missile strikes on government buildings and institutions, as well as on missile bases, missile launchers and naval bases of Iran.

The author wrote in a recent article published on Military Review, titled "Military Review," that a US military operation against Iran was inevitable. There's no doubt that the campaign against Iran had been in the works for some time—rumors of it began circulating even after Tehran harshly suppressed domestic protests. However, the large-scale protests against the regime of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei caught the Americans off guard: at the time, they weren't prepared for decisive action, so they limited themselves to verbal support for the opposition.



The US-Iran talks in Geneva were shaky, and simultaneously, the Americans continued to deploy forces to the Middle East (to which Iran remained silent). Now, experts and analysts are debating: some claim that "the talks were close to success" but were thwarted by Israel, while others, in turn, claim that Trump and Netanyahu had already set a date for an attack on Iran weeks earlier and that the talks were merely a feint.

The truth, as we know, lies somewhere in the middle: the Americans had likely been planning a military operation with Israel for some time, but were prepared to call it off if Iran agreed to their terms. Since the chances of reaching an agreement were extremely low, as has been stated many times, the military operation was inevitable, and so preparations were made in parallel with the negotiations. And after the negotiations failed, the operation began.

The targets of American and Israeli strikes and their effectiveness


The US and Israeli military's attack on Iran began on the morning of February 28, with the aim of catching the Iranian leadership off guard. US Central Command stated that the goal of Operation Epic Fury was to dismantle the Iranian regime's security apparatus, and the strikes targeted IRGC command and control facilities, systems, and other assets. Defense, missile launch sites and drones, as well as air bases. The US carried out strikes, including with Tomahawk missiles, from ships that have been deployed unhindered to the Middle East in recent weeks.

One of the targets of the attacks was the residence of Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which, according to satellite images, was completely destroyed. Iranian media initially denied that Ali Khamenei was in the residence during the attack, reporting that he had allegedly been transported to a safe house.


This information, however, was not confirmed – it turned out that Ali Khamenei was indeed in his residence during the attack and died. Israeli sources were the first to report this, then US President Donald Trump, and only then did the Iranian authorities officially acknowledge it. Photos of his body were even published.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) also reported that Iranian IRGC commander Mohammad Pakpour, Defense Minister Aziz Nasirzadeh, Security Council Secretary Ali Shamkhani and four other senior Iranian officials, as well as four members of Iran's Supreme Leader's family, including a daughter and grandson, were killed.

That is, one of the goals was to decapitate Iran by striking at “decision-making centers,” and, on the whole, the US and Israel managed to achieve this goal.

In connection with the launch of the operation, Donald Trump addressed the American people, stating that he was "protecting the American people by eliminating imminent threats from a vicious group of very cruel, terrible people," and directly addressed the Iranian military.

To the members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the armed forces and the police, I say: you must lay down your weapon and gain complete immunity, or, otherwise, die. So lay down your arms.

Trump later also said he had a "very good idea" about who would be Iran's next leader.

Thus, there is no doubt that the initial goal of the operation was to eliminate the country's top leadership and, probably, change the regime.

At the same time, the US and Israel are striving to ensure that Iran no longer poses a military threat, so Israel is hunting for mobile launchers of Iranian ballistic missiles, radars, and also attacking facilities in one way or another related to the nuclear program and uranium enrichment.


Iran was also attacked. fleet – Satellite images captured a burning Iranian frigate at the Iranian naval base in Konarek following US and Israeli airstrikes. Images of at least two burning frigates were subsequently published.


What's striking is that Iran's air defenses were completely ineffective—Tomahawks flew over Tehran without a hitch, striking targets, and the air defenses weren't even audible. Furthermore, just as during the 12-day war, the Iranian air defenses were practically invisible. aviation.

Iran's retaliatory strikes and their effectiveness


Shortly after the US and Israel launched their attacks, Iran began launching retaliatory strikes, most of which were not aimed at Israel (it was hit, but only in small numbers), but at Gulf Arab states hosting US military bases: Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, and the UAE. In Bahrain, the US Navy's 5th Fleet maintenance center was attacked, and in Qatar, the US Al Udeid air base was targeted.


The effectiveness of the strikes is questionable, as most of the US troops and the most valuable equipment and hardware from these bases have been evacuated, as evidenced by a video showing a Bahraini resident riding a motorcycle onto the US 5th Fleet base where something is burning (likely fuel), but it turns out that no one is there.

"Satellite images" allegedly showing the aftermath of a strike on a US early-warning radar in Qatar, depicting its destruction, have begun circulating online. However, these images turned out to be generated by artificial intelligence (AI). This is easy to spot by carefully examining the provided "images"—the outlines of the buildings don't match, and the vehicle in the "before" and "after" photos is practically in the same place (which is unlikely).


The Gulf Arab states – particularly Saudi Arabia and the UAE – have been subjected to significant attacks from Iran. Videos show rockets falling on five-star hotels and residential buildings. Oil facilities in Saudi Arabia have also been attacked.

As the Military Informant channel rightly notes, Iran is betting not only on massive strikes against Israel, which is protected by powerful air defenses, but also against Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan, where US bases are located. However, the wisdom of such a decision raises questions.

On the one hand, this allows the Iranians to inflict "quick damage" on several US military targets at once, rather than relying on a protracted and methodical attempt to penetrate Israeli air defenses, which could prove ineffective at a very high cost of missiles, as has been the case in the past. On the other hand, by maintaining this "spread-five" approach, Iran may not inflict any significant damage on either Israel or the US, as it is forced to simultaneously deploy ballistic missiles against multiple targets, rather than focusing on one in particular.
- считает "Military informant".

Indeed, it would have been more expedient to carry out strikes on US military bases before the Americans had removed all the most valuable assets from there and redeployed the majority of their troops.

Instead, Iran waited silently while the US quietly moved aircraft and ships into the region, and evacuated its bases in the Middle East (knowing they could be attacked) because it lacked the political will to carry out such strikes, and now it has begun to attack them.

Of course, the infrastructure of some American bases has suffered significant damage (in particular, the American base in Kuwait, apparently, was almost completely destroyed), there are probably some losses, because some minimal service personnel remained there, but so far there is no information about the Americans losing even a single ship or aircraft.

Conclusion


In summary, summing up the first days of the US and Israeli military operation against Iran, the following conclusions can be drawn.

First, the US and Israel have succeeded in eliminating virtually the entire military and political leadership of Iran, which will inevitably lead to a change of power. The regime hasn't fallen yet, though it's too early to say, but it has been decapitated.

It's still unclear whether the US is aiming for complete regime change or simply replacing the political elite with one more pro-American, along the same lines as in Venezuela. This will become clear soon.

Secondly, the US and Israel have complete air superiority and can strike wherever they want without any resistance. Neither Iranian air power nor Iranian air defenses are particularly noticeable.

However, despite the success of the American-Israeli operation, it is doubtful that they will be able to win the war with air operations alone.

Some analysts and military bloggers argue that if the Americans wanted to overthrow the Iranian regime, they should have attacked during the largest Iranian protests that took place in December and January.

This statement may be reasonable, but, as noted above, the United States was not prepared to attack Iran at that time. And launching an attack without preparation would have been reckless. Moreover, after Venezuela, the United States is now expected to deliver quick and obvious results. And in January, the Americans were unable to deliver that.

The duration of the military operation will depend on many factors, but primarily on how quickly the US and Israel can achieve their goals. So far, the war has been generally successful for Washington and its main ally in the region, but if it drags on, it could become a serious problem for Trump.
184 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -2
    3 March 2026 04: 01
    On the other hand, if this “spread-five” approach is maintained, Iran may not cause serious damage to either Israel or the United States at all, since it is forced to simultaneously use ballistic missiles on different targets, without concentrating on any one

    This suggests there's no clear plan or action beyond the hysterical "shoot them all" mentality. Iran's biggest mistake isn't concentrating power in a single hand, but rather creating a triumvirate—that is, three people ruling simultaneously! This is happening in the context of a large-scale war! The swan, the crayfish, and the pike from the fable have come to life.
    1. 0
      3 March 2026 05: 01
      The initial goal of the operation was to eliminate the country's top leadership and, probably, change the regime.
      This is a tried and tested scenario...
      1. 18+
        3 March 2026 06: 27
        Quote: Uncle Lee
        The initial goal of the operation was to eliminate the country's top leadership and, probably, change the regime.
        This is a tried and tested scenario...

        Maybe it's worth learning some working methods of waging war? belay
        Suppression of air defenses, disorganization by eliminating commanders and key figures, destruction of everything that can be bombed?
        And then think - is it worth conducting a ground operation at all?
        But this is too capitalistic an approach.
        1. +9
          3 March 2026 06: 35
          Quote from tsvetahaki
          Maybe it's worth learning some working methods of waging war?
          Suppression of air defenses, disorganization by eliminating commanders and key figures, destruction of everything that can be bombed?
          And then think - is it worth conducting a ground operation at all?

          Come on...
          Shurik, this is not our method!
        2. man
          +1
          3 March 2026 11: 04
          Quote from tsvetahaki
          Quote: Uncle Lee
          The initial goal of the operation was to eliminate the country's top leadership and, probably, change the regime.
          This is a tried and tested scenario...

          Maybe it's worth learning some working methods of waging war? belay
          Suppression of air defenses, disorganization by eliminating commanders and key figures, destruction of everything that can be bombed?
          And then think - is it worth conducting a ground operation at all?

          "Shurik, this is not our method!"
      2. 0
        3 March 2026 07: 13
        One of the targets of the US military strikes was a primary school for girls. It was hit with a precision-guided Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) bomb with a 10-20 meter range. According to the US, the bomb missed by 600 meters, which is impossible. They targeted the school specifically. They targeted it purposefully. They killed 165 primary school girls. This was intended to intimidate the Iranians, but it provoked a furious backlash.
        This is a carefully planned war crime. Someone, after all, personally entered the flight mission and target coordinates. And this on the very first day of the war.
        It's clear that the US goal in this war is to seize Iranian oil, rob the Iranians, and enslave them. Israel has been saying for 30 years that Iran will make an atomic bomb tomorrow. But the bomb still hasn't happened. That's Iran's mistake. They should have made an atomic bomb, like North Korea.
        1. +3
          3 March 2026 09: 52
          The Kabbalistic and capitalist intentions of the American Judeo-Zionist regime are apocalyptic. The Apocalypse is not the end, but the beginning of the end, and this unjust and deceitful old world will soon collapse. Israel's pathetic posture will change nothing, and its sinister deception in Dimona, with all its Jewish wiles, will backfire.
        2. -5
          3 March 2026 10: 59
          Clarifications have already emerged: until 2016, the school building belonged to the IRGC base, then it was repurposed as a school. Considering that over 2000 targets were struck in the first two days and that the country is relatively closed (you can't see panoramas on Google Maps), the Americans could simply have been unaware of the building's change of purpose.
          1. +2
            3 March 2026 15: 35
            Do you really believe this nonsense? We didn't see it, we didn't know it. Or are you an American-Jewish agent, a troll!
            1. +3
              3 March 2026 15: 44
              I don't remember us ever switching to informal terms, but oh well.
              Let me ask you this: does anyone in their right mind really believe that the Americans dropped a bomb (just one of several thousand) on a school on purpose? Not on a barracks, an air defense position, a headquarters, or a hydroelectric power station, for that matter, but on a school filled with small children? For what purpose? To unite Iranian society?
              So yes, I believe it was an unintentional action.
          2. -7
            3 March 2026 18: 40
            Quote: parma
            Clarifications have already emerged: until 2016, the school building belonged to the IRGC base, then it was repurposed as a school. Considering that over 2000 targets were struck in the first two days and that the country is relatively closed (you can't see panoramas on Google Maps), the Americans could simply have been unaware of the building's change of purpose.

            Who are you telling these tales to? So they knew where the entire Iranian leadership was, and killed them along with their families and children. But they didn't know where the school was? Don't make me laugh.
        3. man
          +3
          3 March 2026 11: 33
          Quote: Bearded
          It was deliberate. They killed 165 elementary school girls. It was intended to intimidate Iranians, but it backfired violently.

          This is so terrible... I just can't believe they did this on purpose... I don't want to believe it...
          1. +3
            3 March 2026 14: 18
            Yes, most likely not on purpose, of course. But these children and their parents don't care anymore who planned what.
          2. -3
            3 March 2026 18: 42
            Quote: mann
            Quote: Bearded
            It was deliberate. They killed 165 elementary school girls. It was intended to intimidate Iranians, but it backfired violently.

            This is so terrible... I just can't believe they did this on purpose... I don't want to believe it...

            171 girls were killed.
            If you don't want to, don't believe it.
            But this is a fact that happened.
            1. man
              0
              3 March 2026 19: 13
              Quote: Bearded
              171 girls were killed.
              If you don't want to, don't believe it.
              But this is a fact that happened.

              I know. I don't want to believe that. specially...the school was deliberately bombed. Faith in humanity is being lost...
              1. -5
                3 March 2026 19: 42
                Quote: mann
                Quote: Bearded
                171 girls were killed.
                If you don't want to, don't believe it.
                But this is a fact that happened.

                I know. I don't want to believe that. specially...the school was deliberately bombed. Faith in humanity is being lost...

                Today, the residence of the Council of Experts was attacked. Eighty-eight experts are supposed to elect a new ayatollah. These are actually religious figures. It's as if Ukrainian Nazis bombed the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church.
                And you don’t want to believe.
                For the US and Israel, nothing is sacred.
                1. 0
                  3 March 2026 19: 57
                  It's as if Ukrainian Nazis bombed the Holy Synod of the Russian Orthodox Church.

                  Ugh on you!
                  Stop giving ideas to the enemy!
                2. +6
                  3 March 2026 20: 09
                  Quote: Bearded
                  Today, the residence of the Council of Experts was attacked. The 88 experts are scheduled to elect a new ayatollah.

                  Are you unaware that the Ayatollah wields far more power than a mere priest of the Russian Orthodox Church? The Supreme Leader of Iran, or Rahbar (Persian: رهبر‎), is the head of state and the highest political and religious office in the Islamic Republic of Iran. In addition to his functions as the highest arbiter, the Supreme Leader also intervenes in day-to-day personnel matters. He personally appoints and dismisses the faqihs of the Guardian Council (Iran's most influential oversight body, which can overrule any of the three branches of government), the highest official in the Judiciary, the heads of the Islamic Republic of Iran Television and Radio Broadcasting Company, the Chief of the Joint Staff, the Commander-in-Chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, and the commanders of the armed forces and internal troops.
              2. +5
                3 March 2026 20: 05
                Quote: mann
                I don’t want to believe that the school was deliberately... consciously bombed.

                This doesn't make any sense or have any positive consequences, so I'm sure it was a mistake, although this doesn't change the fact that they are guilty.
                1. man
                  +3
                  3 March 2026 22: 14
                  Quote: 2 level advisor
                  Quote: mann
                  I don’t want to believe that the school was deliberately... consciously bombed.

                  This doesn't make any sense or have any positive consequences, so I'm sure it was a mistake, although this doesn't change the fact that they are guilty.

                  I completely agree with you... literally with every word... The fact that I am plagued by doubts is due to the fact that under the new capitalism that came after the collapse of the USSR, some illogical, terrible events, completely unthinkable before, have begun to occur frequently... take, for example, our war with Ukraine... sad
                  But thanks anyway... I feel a little better now. hi
              3. +3
                4 March 2026 00: 15
                Quote: mann
                I know. I don't want to believe that the school was deliberately... intentionally bombed. I'm losing faith in humanity...

                There's an IRGC military base nearby. The building used to be part of the base, but then it was separated. They just had old information.
                But this doesn't absolve them of their guilt. It's a war crime, pure and simple. The aggressor is always to blame; if they hadn't started bombing, they wouldn't have made "mistakes."
                1. man
                  +2
                  4 March 2026 00: 21
                  Quote: Belisarius
                  But this doesn't absolve them of their guilt. It's a war crime, pure and simple. The aggressor is always to blame; if they hadn't started bombing, they wouldn't have made "mistakes."

                  Yes, but you must agree that a deliberate, cold-blooded blow to children and an erroneous one are not the same thing...
                  1. +1
                    4 March 2026 00: 24
                    Quote: mann
                    Yes, but you must agree that a deliberate, cold-blooded blow to children and an erroneous one are not the same thing...

                    I agree. I'm critical of the US's, and especially Israel's, humanitarianism when it comes to Iran, but the second-tier advisor is right in his statement—it's simply not in their interests. They certainly didn't do it consciously.
              4. 0
                4 March 2026 00: 20
                Quote: mann
                I don't want to believe that it was done on purpose...

                Well, there are many things you don’t want to believe. Some people may not want to believe in the existence of gravity, but it is a fact and ignoring it can sometimes have deadly consequences.
    2. -8
      3 March 2026 06: 15
      Iran is destroying nearby bases involved in attacks on Iran. It couldn't be more logical—systematic destruction. And yet, each subsequent strike becomes increasingly effective.
      And yet, the US and Azrael have ALREADY produced over 1000 Patriots, out of a production rate of 250 per year and stockpiles depleted by the previous war. And Iran hasn't even begun to unpack its main arsenals. So far, everything is going according to their plan.
      1. 0
        3 March 2026 07: 14
        The whole question here is how long Iran's missiles will last. After all, the economic potential of the US and Iran is incomparable. The US could easily increase weapons production, along with its allies. Iran, however, is alone.
        If the US can also use Arab forces to launch a ground operation against Iran, how long will Iran last? It's clear that Arabs aren't warriors, but still.
        The US will only "collapse" if it suffers critical human losses, but Iran itself is unlikely to be able to achieve this.
        1. -8
          3 March 2026 07: 22
          No, there's no infantry for the ground—the Arab allies didn't even have enough to deal with the Houthis, with their horrific defeats. And here's Iran, a long-standing combat-ready country. NOT NOMADIC TRIBES. Iran slammed into its arsenals what it was fighting, the US what it was selling. Expensive and scarce.
          1. +4
            3 March 2026 07: 28
            Well, there are also questions about Iran as a "combat-ready country." In Syria, for example, Iran was mostly fighting with its "infantry" against the "bourgeoisie." After we "stepped away" from Syria, everything ended...
            I understand that fighting for your country and somewhere in Syria are two different things, but still.
            1. -10
              3 March 2026 07: 29
              So there's a difference with the enemy. There was one in Syria, but against Iran—they're gone now. Those who were in Syria took over the country there, they won't go to Iran to die. And in Syria, the military didn't lose again, they simply dispersed. What will Iran do there?
              1. -1
                3 March 2026 07: 37
                I agree with you, our military did not lose in Syria, those who wanted a "deal" with their "partners" "lost".
            2. +4
              3 March 2026 08: 02
              Quote: Vladimir M
              In the same Syria, Iran fought mainly with "infantry" against the Barmaleys.

              Although the fighting was mostly done by the Hazaras and Palestinians, driven from behind by the IRGC, and we provided artillery and air cover. When the Palestinians and Hazaras fled (because there was no one left to cover them), the IRGC fled, too, fleeing faster than anyone else. All the Arabs needed was to seize the coast to open the strait.
              1. -1
                3 March 2026 08: 52
                This raises the question of whether the IRGC will scatter in different directions.
                Although, they can fight for their country
                1. +4
                  3 March 2026 09: 11
                  Quote: Vladimir M
                  This raises the question of whether the IRGC will scatter in different directions.

                  Anyone whose skies are filled with enemies will flee. Without food and ammunition, it's impossible to fight.
        2. -1
          3 March 2026 11: 48
          I like the idea—they could ramp up rocket production. To produce one inertial sensor (ours), we use 12-15 solvents and 8-10 compounds. Plus, there are 50 pages of assembly instructions. Each compound has its own drying time. It's not like gluing rubber boots. And there are so many sensors in a rocket. And the Americans haven't stopped supplying the South Koreans in 23.
          1. -1
            3 March 2026 12: 39
            I don’t argue that there are difficulties, and not small ones, in “increasing production.”
            But the fact is that it is easier for the US to do this than for Iran.
        3. -2
          3 March 2026 14: 20
          In fact, things aren't quite so simple here. US weapons take a long time to produce and are expensive. Iranian weapons are cheap and quick to produce. It's entirely possible that, in terms of "how many missiles and drones can Iran produce per day," it surpasses the US in its ability to produce anti-missile defenses.
        4. -1
          3 March 2026 16: 02
          The capitalists will "deflate" as soon as the costs approach the potential benefits of this undertaking. Humans aren't a particularly valuable resource for them, so Iran simply needs to hold out as long as possible to increase the attackers' costs. Besides, Trump doesn't like to wait too long.
    3. -1
      3 March 2026 11: 40
      Quote: Puncher
      actions at the level of hysteria "shoot everyone".

      A sensible strategy—Iran is hitting the US and its allies where they're already suffering billions of dollars in losses—traffic in Hormuz has stalled, factories are burning, airports are idle, oil and gas prices are rising. And, most importantly, it's claiming it has nothing to do with it.

      That's how it should be.
      1. -3
        3 March 2026 11: 43
        Quote: Olgovich
        That's how it should be.

        This is stupid. The blows need to be concentrated, but this way, three sisters each get an earring...
        The US and its allies are already suffering billions of dollars in losses—traffic in Hormuz has stalled, factories are burning, airports are idle, and oil and gas prices are rising.

        You're exaggerating too much. You shouldn't trust propaganda so much.
        1. -2
          3 March 2026 13: 30
          Quote: Puncher
          This is stupid. The blows should be concentrated, but as it is, three sisters each get earrings.

          It's stupid to hit where they expect the end of the blows
          Quote: Puncher
          You're exaggerating too much. You shouldn't trust propaganda so much.

          belay Give an example of propaganda.
          1. +2
            3 March 2026 17: 57
            Quote: Olgovich
            Give an example of propaganda.

            All the news about the destruction of American bases.
            The Americans have given them a dummy for Iran to waste its munitions on. These strikes, which supposedly destroy something, have no impact on the strike potential of the US and Israel. But propaganda presents this as a victory, and everyone is buying it. How many airbases have been destroyed in Israel, and from where are they launching strikes on Iran? Zero. Ben-Gurion Airport is home to tankers that refuel strike aircraft. How many missiles have hit it? Zero. Instead, they show you empty bases that have supposedly been destroyed... Is that enough?
            1. -4
              3 March 2026 18: 13
              Quote: Puncher
              Is it enough?

              No, of course not - where do I have even a word about bases?

              I repeat-
              Traffic in Hormuz has come to a standstill, factories are burning, airports are idle, oil and gas prices are rising
              -Where is the propaganda?
              1. +2
                3 March 2026 18: 20
                Quote: Olgovich
                -Where is the propaganda?

                In the effectiveness of strikes.
                1. -5
                  3 March 2026 18: 37
                  Quote: Puncher

                  In the effectiveness of strikes.

                  third once:
                  Traffic in Hormuz has come to a standstill, factories are burning, airports are idle, oil and gas prices are rising
                  -these are just facts.
                  1. 0
                    3 March 2026 20: 16
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    Traffic in Hormuz has come to a standstill, factories are burning, airports are idle, oil and gas prices are rising
                    -these are just facts.

                    So what? What's so scary? The fires are out, the Dubai airport is open.
                    Let's look at it from a different perspective. Ukraine has been attacking Russian factories, terminals, and oil storage facilities for years. Fires, deaths, traffic disruptions. Airports were closed. So what? Is our industry in collapse? Are our factories not operating? And notice, unlike the Arab countries, we are under sanctions, so recovery is much more difficult for us. The Arabs are panicking because this is new to them. They'll get used to it. They have as much money as a fool has tobacco, they'll restore everything, and then they'll charge Iran for the damages.
                    1. +1
                      3 March 2026 21: 07
                      Quote: Puncher
                      So what? What's so scary?

                      You're preventing people from "almost winning" laughing
                    2. -1
                      4 March 2026 10: 49
                      Quote: Puncher
                      What's scary?

                      The losses are terrible. Where's the propaganda, I ask for the fifth time?
                      1. 0
                        4 March 2026 11: 35
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        Propaganda - where is it, I ask for the fifth time?

                        Everywhere
                        The IRGC announced the destruction of a US FPS-132 radar system in Qatar.

                        Please.
                        Quote: Olgovich
                        the losses are terrible.

                        What's scary?
                      2. -1
                        4 March 2026 13: 28
                        Quote: Puncher
                        Everywhere

                        .i.e. nowhere
                        Quote: Puncher
                        The IRGC announced the destruction of a US FPS-132 radar system in Qatar.

                        Where is it at my place?
                        Quote: Puncher
                        What's scary?

                        at a loss. Or is it useful?
      2. +1
        3 March 2026 13: 21
        Quote: Olgovich
        A smart strategy: Iran is hitting the soft spots of the US and its allies, who are already suffering billions of dollars in losses.

        The US doesn't buy oil and gas from the Gulf, and the US only benefits from rising prices... The EU and China, yes, lose, but they didn't attack Iran.
        1. -2
          3 March 2026 13: 53
          Quote: Level 2 Advisor
          The US does not buy oil and gas from the Gulf

          1. The United States imported more oil in 2025 than it exported, including from South Africa.
          2. There are huge American investments there, and yesterday an American tanker was on fire.
          3 US allies suffer billions in losses.
          4.
          Quote: Level 2 Advisor
          they did not attack Iran..

          protected?
          1. +2
            3 March 2026 14: 05
            1. They only get about 20 percent of their imports from the Gulf, and they compensate for this by raising prices and selling their own and Venezuelan oil.
            2.
            Quote: Olgovich
            There are huge American investments there, and yesterday an American tanker was on fire.

            I don't care about the tanker—the US is a state. It belongs to a small private company, and I'm sure it's insured.
            Well, some will suffer, it seems to me that with a big price increase it will pay off... so far I haven't noticed any critical, super-expensive damage to the mining infrastructure from the news...
            Plus if there is insurance?
            3.
            Quote: Olgovich
            3 US allies suffer billions in losses.

            Whatever, they'll still remain allies...
            4. What did you protect? Are you talking about China and the EU starting a war with the US over Iran?
            1. -4
              3 March 2026 18: 34
              Quote: Level 2 Advisor
              everyone compensates for p

              compensate damages, but would have made a profit.
              Quote: Level 2 Advisor
              I don't care about the tanker - the US, as a state... it belongs to a small private company.

              And what does the state consist of? Or - Three lousy suicide bombers damaged the American Amazon data center - the company stopped and suffered long-term losses in the billions.
              Quote: Level 2 Advisor
              So far, I haven't noticed any critical, extremely expensive damage to the mining infrastructure from the news...

              Qatar has stopped liquefying gas, and Hormuz is closed. Where will the oil/gas be collected? Iraq has stopped producing and closed the pipeline.
              Quote: Level 2 Advisor
              Whatever, they will remain allies anyway.

              their losses - they don't care? belay
              Quote: Level 2 Advisor
              Are you talking about China and the EU starting a war with the US over Iran?

              Why? Let them bear the losses—what's wrong with that?
              1. +1
                3 March 2026 19: 58
                Quote: Olgovich
                compensate for losses, but would have made a profit.

                They're making a profit, so what difference does it make what kind of oil? They sold their own, the same amount as always, without selling the Gulf oil at a price even 30% higher. They earned more than before the war, including the Gulf oil (20%). Just numbers? And they'll get more because demand will grow and the price won't be 30% higher.
                Quote: Olgovich
                And what does the state consist of? Or - Three lousy suicide bombers damaged the American Amazon data center - the company stopped and suffered long-term losses in the billions.

                Quote: Olgovich
                Three lousy suicide bombers damaged the data center of the American Amazon - the company stopped and suffered long-term losses in the billions.

                It's not even close. They have data centers all over the world, and the damage to two of them caused temporary interruptions in service at the BV, not "the company stopped and suffered long-term losses in the billions."
                Quote: Olgovich
                Qatar has stopped liquefying gas, and Hormuz is closed. Where will the oil/gas be collected? Iraq has stopped producing and closed the pipeline.

                And imagine how the US will make money from those who took all this - by starting to supply it through itself from other places...
                Quote: Olgovich
                their losses - they don't care?

                Yes, because there is no other hegemon in the world... if they want to leave, they will get a slap on the wrist and no one will stand up for them. It is better to endure than to be without a roof over their heads - this has been the fate of any small country throughout history.
                Quote: Olgovich
                Why? Let them bear the losses—what's wrong with that?

                China would suffer losses several orders of magnitude greater from a war with the US—which is more profitable? Moreover, no one has a military alliance with Iran, so why would they? Besides, whoever wins, China won't be left without oil; it will start borrowing from Russia as a last resort—so why bother with a war with such uncertain prospects?
                P.S. The West is not united, and the US will not "care" about the finances of other countries, to its own detriment. This is called capitalism/globalism, and it rules the world today.
                1. -1
                  4 March 2026 10: 59
                  Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                  they have a profit and so

                  and it will be like this later, if there will be losses for now.
                  Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                  It's not even close. They have data centers all over the world, and the damage to 2 of them caused temporary interruptions in service at the BV,

                  so close - the largest center is blocked and for a long time - read Aaron himself.
                  Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                  And imagine how the US will earn money from those who took all this - by starting to supply it through itself from other places.

                  lol from Mars?
                  Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                  yes

                  Let them speak for themselves, you are not them.
                  Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                  China will suffer losses from a war with the US that are several orders of magnitude greater—which is more profitable?

                  Let both of them carry it, that's good.
                  Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                  Why a war with unclear prospects?

                  What are you doing with the China war? Where did I find anything about it?
                  Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                  The West is not united and the US will not "care" about the finances of other countries, to its own detriment

                  Well, let it split further - that's also good.
                  1. +1
                    4 March 2026 11: 11
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    and it will be like this later, if there will be losses for now.

                    This often happens: first there are losses on investments, and then profits... and meanwhile, oil has already risen by 10% and this is clearly not the limit...
                    Plus, starting with Venezuela, I think the US is showing all the small countries that there's no need to show off, otherwise we'll come to you too, very clearly... I think everyone has already appreciated it, and that's much more valuable than the potential losses, which, moreover, I'm sure will soon be compensated...
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    so close - the largest center is blocked and for a long time - read Aaron himself.

                    "According to documents reviewed by Bloomberg and SourceMaterial, Amazon's data center network comprises more than 900 facilities in more than 50 countries." So, there are problems, and that's a fact. Amazon's disasters and collapses—no, that's also a fact... The stocks didn't feel it, and even rose 0,5%—that certainly doesn't look like global problems, does it?
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    from Mars?

                    Is our gas and oil only in the Gulf? It's still unclear where exactly it's going from Russia—nobody's reporting on it.
                    Quote: Olgovich
                    Let both of them carry it, that's good.

                    Quote: Olgovich
                    Well, let it split further - that's also good.

                    Here, as often happens, I completely agree with you. hi
                    1. 0
                      4 March 2026 13: 31
                      Quote: Level 2 Advisor
                      Here, as often happens, I completely agree with you.

                      hi
                    2. -1
                      5 March 2026 13: 39
                      Some claimed Trump was betting on lower oil prices, on a collapse of the hydrocarbon market. He did, they say. And the Republican electorate is unlikely to be happy if gasoline prices in the US also rise.

                      Modern wars are very expensive and wasteful. So even the perks of capturing resources don't always pay off.
                      The US has long been waging wars for oil... and is heavily in debt. China hasn't fought anyone for oil and has amassed a fortune. The US can only quietly envy it.

                      The current conflict, by and large, isn't very beneficial for either the US or Trump personally. Europe isn't even worth mentioning. But Israel desperately needs it. The Jews have simply conned Donald and are using him as a militant homosexual to the fullest extent.
        2. -4
          3 March 2026 14: 27
          That's not the logic. The US is suffering significant reputational damage because its allies are being treated like a hot water bottle. And the Arabs are slowly beginning to see the light—is this US alliance really that beneficial if the US effectively only defends Israel, while all they're willing to sell them is missiles for exorbitant prices, and only after they've satisfied their own and Israel's needs.
          1. +1
            3 March 2026 14: 29
            Quote from: newtc7
            That's not the logic.

            If we're being completely honest, we need to see how it ends and who ends up getting screwed... the rest are all just ideas and thoughts... if the Americans get screwed, you're right, if Iran, then no... hi
  2. 0
    3 March 2026 05: 22
    In 1979, the US embassy in Tehran was seized. Revenge was exacted.
    Yes, the reason for this war is not revenge for that capture, but the idea of ​​revenge
    sat in the Americans.
    I couldn't help but sit.
    1. -3
      3 March 2026 07: 14
      Quote: Andrey Krutilin
      In 1979, the US embassy in Tehran was seized. Revenge was exacted.
      Yes, the reason for this war is not revenge for that capture, but the idea of ​​revenge
      sat in the Americans.
      I couldn't help but sit.

      There is one reason: Iranian oil should belong to the United States.
      The US does not bomb countries that have no resources.
      1. +6
        3 March 2026 07: 34
        The US does not bomb countries that have no resources.
        Yugoslavia?
        1. -5
          3 March 2026 08: 01
          Quote: 3x3zsave
          The US does not bomb countries that have no resources.
          Yugoslavia?

          We need to see what resources are there.
          1. The comment was deleted.
        2. +4
          3 March 2026 09: 19
          There's no Yugoslavia now, that's the result of the bombing. Small ones are easier to deal with than big ones.
          You know how it is in another country. First they reduced it, now their protégé talks about multinationality from morning till night. It's no secret that a united country is stronger. A tale about twigs.
          1. man
            +1
            3 March 2026 11: 46
            Quote: Gardamir
            a united country is stronger.

            If only your words had been heard by three freaks in 1991...
      2. 0
        3 March 2026 10: 01
        Sorry, but this is clear to everyone.
        Just reminded me of the vindictiveness of the Anglo-Saxons.
  3. -8
    3 March 2026 06: 12
    The idea of ​​a change of power is complete nonsense. Firstly, the country is ruled by a president, and he hasn't changed. Secondly, the ayatollahs, the spiritual leaders, have changed repeatedly, without any visible change. Thirdly, a change of government to a more loyal one requires such sentiments within Iran, but now there's a surge of anti-Americanism, and the leadership will definitely change to a more radical one. Actually, Iran ALREADY warned 20 times before, and never attacked countries not directly involved, like Cyprus and Britain. Now it's calmly attacking all enemies, ignoring the hysteria of "I'm yours, you bourgeois."
    And there's no sign of any US accomplishments. The strike on the residence was pointless, the leadership lost nothing, and there was no effect on military targets, as evidenced by Iran's response. But the carrier strike group that fled after the Iranian strike says it all.
    1. +5
      3 March 2026 06: 32
      Quote: Foggy Dew
      And not a single task completed by the US is visible.

      What should be considered their task?
      It seems to me that the destruction of industry - primarily nuclear and missile - but also, just in case, that which could lead to their revival, is a sufficient goal...
      And what the people who have been brought to the level of Syria will do there afterwards is of no particular interest to them.
      Attempts to recreate industry in the future are easily suppressed by small forces...

      Actually, after this, let the army and the KFSIR with machine guns remain...
      The question is: will there be enough bombs and missiles to destroy all the targets?
      1. +2
        3 March 2026 06: 38
        Quote from tsvetahaki
        The question is: will there be enough bombs and missiles to destroy all the targets?

        It's already possible to use conventional gravity bombs there. It would be easy enough to wipe out industry.
        Quote from tsvetahaki
        Attempts to recreate industry in the future are easily suppressed by small forces...

        Have you noticed that the oil industry is not being touched?
        1. +1
          3 March 2026 06: 43
          Quote: Puncher
          Have you noticed that the oil industry is not being touched?

          And this is a very smart - albeit obvious - move.
          Why? The scenario I described is a worst-case scenario with little benefit. Eliminating the threat without any particular benefit—in fact, the US is perfectly fine without Iranian oil, as they sell it themselves. But with Iranian oil from US companies, it's even better.
          And they will always have time to bomb it in case of plan "B".
      2. -6
        3 March 2026 06: 42
        So what about industry? Last time they at least tried to pound the air defenses, but they still missed a beat, something they themselves officially admitted when they started this war. Now they're not even trying—they're just pounding the deserts and Muslim martyrs.
        1. +1
          3 March 2026 06: 51
          Quote: Foggy Dew
          Last time they at least tried to hit the bunker with anti-bunker missiles, but they didn't hit anything, which they themselves admitted officially when they started this war.

          Where did you get such strange information???
          They're giving briefings every day now. At the first one, a command representative showed the results of the six previous hits, and they even managed to get a look inside (the Iranians provided footage) – the destruction, etc. I watched the conference in English myself...
          So where did this strange information come from? Why didn't it get through?

          Yes, and now they are hitting command centers with bunker busters (for example, B2s flew here with them) - of other brands.
          1. -7
            3 March 2026 06: 54
            From a camel! IF they destroyed everything last time, where did the nuclear threat from Iran come from again, tell me! The answer: they didn't destroy a damn thing. And making cartoons about supposedly being destroyed while whining that nothing was destroyed is their usual practice. The same thing happened with the AUG, which wasn't hit, only it practically ran off to Pearl Harbor.
            1. +3
              3 March 2026 06: 59
              Quote: Foggy Dew
              From a camel!

              Well, if from these sources... belay
              But if you just think about it, what does the destruction of the plant mean? It's called a reprieve. Some centrifuges might have been undamaged and could be dug up—just like the enriched uranium.
              New centrifuges can be built. Oil is sold. Factories are operating. The people and the party are united.
              It's understandable at a level - well, above the level of a camel's intelligence, but simple enough to digest, I hope.
              1. -5
                3 March 2026 07: 04
                Worry about your own brain, you're laughing like a camel. Not to mention you've never even touched a centrifuge, and fundamentally don't understand that after a real impact, centrifuges are scrapped. They're not like washing machines, which, if out of balance, would break down completely. And centrifuges need to be adjusted, otherwise they wouldn't work.
                So the strike didn't affect anything at all, since industry wasn't damaged. "Unearthed" and "operating" is for garage workshops, not industrial production, especially heavy machinery and radiochemicals, which only a handful of countries worldwide can handle.
                What a strange logic – if you can't destroy the nuclear industry completely – they'll dig it up anyway – then you have to bomb it! Where did you find such a camel to dictate it to you?
                1. +3
                  3 March 2026 19: 14
                  Oh! Your camel might even know the word "uranium hexafluoride"!
                  But don't limit your development to what a camel can tell you. To avoid reading tons of clever, specialized books, at least add some AI to it!
                  You'll also learn how centrifuge plants are built in seismically active zones (like this Fordow plant). How many halls does a plant have? What can be destroyed by two sets of impacts? What spare parts are needed? What centrifuges are serviced and manufactured, for example, at Natanz and elsewhere.
                  Ask the AI ​​to review expert estimates of plant restoration time (publicly available information). You'll learn that for minor damage, it's months, while for severe damage, it's 1-3 years...
                  And then, even without a camel, a THOUGHT should come to your mind!
                  There are only two ways to destroy the capabilities of a country that has reached such levels of nuclear weapons production. One, I'll give you a hint, is strict controls.
                  Consider the second method.
                  1. -2
                    4 March 2026 07: 21
                    But yours doesn't know what uranyl nitrate and tributyl phosphate are, so go where you were going, internet expert.
        2. +2
          3 March 2026 07: 06
          Quote: Foggy Dew
          So what about industry?

          It's just that some fans of the US and Israel are trying to come up with an explanation for why something went wrong and it wasn't an easy walk.
          1. -6
            3 March 2026 07: 13
            They have a hard job - you have to be a vacuum pump to suck out anything))) But apparently, that's exactly what they were taught long ago - that's why laughing
      3. +2
        3 March 2026 07: 22
        Quote from tsvetahaki
        Quote: Foggy Dew
        And not a single task completed by the US is visible.

        What should be considered their task?
        It seems to me that the destruction of industry - primarily nuclear and missile - but also, just in case, that which could lead to their revival, is a sufficient goal...
        And what the people who have been brought to the level of Syria will do there afterwards is of no particular interest to them.
        Attempts to recreate industry in the future are easily suppressed by small forces...

        Actually, after this, let the army and the KFSIR with machine guns remain...
        The question is: will there be enough bombs and missiles to destroy all the targets?

        Iran, however, could well have enough martyrs to destroy the oil and gas production and refining industries of the US's Arab allies, in which American companies have a significant stake, sink a ton of tankers, and pollute all Arab resorts with oil. The damage would amount to at least a trillion dollars. The prosperity of the Persian Gulf countries would be forgotten. Europe, too, would bury its industry and be completely subjugated by the US. Could this be Trump's goal?
        1. +5
          3 March 2026 07: 59
          Um... Is the US's goal to drown the Arabs and the EU? It's hard to believe; they're already behind them in all their plans. It's more likely that the Americans are counting on a successful operation without heavy losses. And not without reason, to be honest.
          1. -3
            3 March 2026 08: 00
            Quote: a.shlidt
            Um... Is the US's goal to drown the Arabs and the EU? It's hard to believe; they're already behind them in all their plans. It's more likely that the Americans are counting on a successful operation without heavy losses. And not without reason, to be honest.

            If Iran destroys the Arab oil industry, the losses will be very severe, including for Trump.
            1. +5
              3 March 2026 08: 22
              This is if... If the oil company is taken out, if the strait is closed, if the aircraft carrier is sunk... There are a lot of "ifs", although a lot could have already been done.
              1. -2
                3 March 2026 08: 25
                Quote: a.shlidt
                This is if... If the oil company is taken out, if the strait is closed, if the aircraft carrier is sunk... There are a lot of "ifs", although a lot could have already been done.

                Well, for now, Iran has seriously depleted the anti-aircraft missile arsenals of the US and its allies. From now on, it will be easier to hit targets with cheap Shahed missiles.
                1. +4
                  3 March 2026 08: 29
                  Given the inactivity of Iranian air power and air defense, the Americans and Jews only need to keep some aircraft in the air to combat the Shaheed. This will be easy for them, again due to the passivity and incompetence of the Iranians in the air.
                  1. -3
                    3 March 2026 08: 32
                    Quote: a.shlidt
                    Given the inactivity of Iranian air power and air defense, the Americans and Jews only need to keep some aircraft in the air to combat the Shaheed. This will be easy for them, again due to the passivity and incompetence of the Iranians in the air.

                    Last time, the Iranian air force also acted passively. It's unknown what losses it suffered. Perhaps they're holding it in reserve. The US and Israel also have a finite number of missiles. Then it will be the air force's turn. If Iran manages to keep its air force in bunkers by then, it will have a response.
                    1. +5
                      3 March 2026 09: 25
                      The number of missiles of the US and Israel is also not infinite.

                      I doubt air-to-air missiles are being wasted at this point. I also doubt that the Iranian air force could pose even a hypothetical threat to US and Israeli forces.
                      1. -5
                        3 March 2026 09: 47
                        You probably can't wrap your head around the most simple and obvious thing. Iranian aircraft could be used for bombings and air-to-ground missiles, not dogfights. To do this, certain conditions must be created. Preserve personnel. Preserve equipment. Overload the enemy's air defenses at the right moment, and much more... Would this be suicide for Iranian pilots? Possibly. But it wasn't Iran that pushed them to this point, but the scum in Israel and the US.
                      2. +9
                        3 March 2026 10: 06
                        You yourself write that Iran needs this, that, and much more to use its air force. And you rightly point out that this would be suicide for the pilots.
                        Iran currently lacks the military power to engage in aerial combat. The only thing it can do is launch missiles and bury launchers underground.
                      3. -1
                        3 March 2026 13: 18
                        The main thing is the result. I am confident Iran will achieve it. For now, the top priority in this Middle East chaos is the destruction of the IDF (ground forces) in southern Lebanon. There are many targets, but drowning Israel's ground operation in blood would be another nail in the coffin of the aggressors, the US and Israel. Destroying military manpower must be a priority. Meanwhile, the IDF, under cover of the general chaos, is destroying neighborhoods of Beirut. Iran simply must curb their ardor.
                      4. +3
                        3 March 2026 13: 28
                        I'm afraid we'll be disappointed with Iran's results. The US and Israel are using the Douhet Doctrine in their military campaigns, and it's what's bringing them success.
                      5. -2
                        3 March 2026 13: 36
                        You say air superiority. Well, that means we'll have to destroy aircraft hangars and damage airfield runways. Fill the mountains with portable air defense units. Does Iran even have sabotage and reconnaissance groups to guide missiles and artillery shells to their targets? There are many questions, but there's always a solution.
                      6. man
                        +1
                        3 March 2026 12: 34
                        Quote: Bookinist69
                        scum in Israel and the USA

                        I hate clerical regimes, but after these events I must criticize you for being too diplomatic... My more appropriate names, VO, unfortunately, castrates
                      7. -1
                        3 March 2026 10: 06
                        No one is stopping you from doubting.
                        But imagine, for example, a thousand cheap Shaheeds shot down by a thousand expensive missiles. That would mean Iran is winning.
                      8. +7
                        3 March 2026 10: 18
                        My doubts are fueled by the image of Tehran being bombed with impunity. But the notion that Iran is winning at all is completely unfounded.
                        Honestly, on February 28.02th, I imagined Abraham Lincoln sinking, but that was just my wildest wishful thinking. I also don't think Iran will seriously undermine its adversaries.
                        Iran does not seek or attempt to block the Gulf or destroy the Arab oil industry.
                      9. +3
                        3 March 2026 10: 27
                        Well, here we choose for ourselves who to believe now. Because in five years, no one will be hiding the truth.
                      10. +3
                        3 March 2026 11: 43
                        There's no need to trust anyone. In this world, that's inherently wrong. Just absorb the information and analyze it without bias.
                    2. +6
                      3 March 2026 11: 38
                      What kind of aviation are they saving? Almost all of Iran's aircraft are half a century old, and they have no flying radars. If the Air Force isn't used now, after the air defenses are finished off, it'll be like "grouse hunting," and ground targets will be destroyed by cheap Jadams.
                      Iran can't retaliate properly either, as Iran has historically had a major problem with electricity generation. If they keep attacking the Arabs, they could hit their hydroelectric power plants, and then things will get even tighter. I think the Iranians' only hope is that the US/Israel "missile budget" will run out before the receivers in Tehran run out...
                      1. 0
                        3 March 2026 13: 28
                        I agree about the energy issue. The rest is debatable. The missiles are flying. Interim results: some are reaching their targets. As for the air force, it's all old crap, and that's undeniable. And where are all those vaunted suicide bombers from Iran? Fairy tales and the pranks of Jewish TV, nothing more!? Plus, the drones should really make life miserable for the Jews. The rest is still just fog of war.
                      2. +4
                        3 March 2026 13: 59
                        What's controversial? Iran's weapons stockpiles are depleting due to both launches and incoming missiles, while Israel/US stockpiles are depleting due to launches alone… it's a one-sided game.
                        Regarding the suicide bombers, Iran's proxies have been severely battered in recent years; they're effectively ineffective. Something tells me that if Hamas hadn't staged their attack back then, everything that's happening now could have been avoided.
                      3. 0
                        3 March 2026 14: 06
                        The timing of the bloody attack by the Hamaz Special Forces, the scale of the planned losses and the destruction of the border defense system - all this is a carefully planned and well-executed operation by the Mossad.
                      4. -2
                        3 March 2026 14: 09
                        Only an idiot wouldn't understand the Hamas operation. This is an Israeli operation, a precedent for the destruction of Gaza. The suicide bombings are also just fairy tales. And the launches. Iran has the ability to attack Israel with drones for a long time, and it will continue to do so. The point here isn't to win, but to inflict maximum damage with minimal resources and forces. The IDF is currently striking Beirut and will continue to do so. Iran simply must deprive Israel of this ability.
                      5. +1
                        3 March 2026 14: 16
                        Quote: Bookinist69
                        The IDF is currently striking Beirut and will continue to do so. Iran is simply obliged to deprive Israel of this opportunity.

                        Not on Beirut, but on Hezbollah bases in order to protect the Iron Dome from overload from possible rocket attacks and UAVs
                      6. -1
                        3 March 2026 14: 19
                        So Iran will also attack IDF bases located in residential areas. Don't be surprised later... It's a Jewish tactic to use civilians as cover. It's proven itself in the Middle East, as well as in Ukraine. The lives of goyim don't matter, do they? Konnick
                      7. 0
                        3 March 2026 14: 22
                        Quote: Bookinist69
                        So Iran will also attack IDF bases located in residential areas. Don't be surprised later... It's a Jewish tactic to use civilians as cover. It's proven itself in the Middle East, as well as in Ukraine. The lives of goyim don't matter, do they? Konnick

                        Are you aware of the locations of IDF bases? When it was possible to hide behind "civilians" from the Muslims, I believe Hamas took hostages from "civilians" and used them as cover.
                      8. -1
                        3 March 2026 14: 32
                        Israel owes its existence to 7 million hostages, citizens of a country that wages bloody war after bloody war, using only civilians as a cover. When a rocket lands and people (Israelis) die, the country's leadership (Israel) gleefully broadcasts this to the world and goes on to bomb its neighbors. The answer is simple: Israel's neighbors don't hate them as much as they hate themselves and everyone around them. They will stop at nothing and resort to any cruelty and baseness to get what they want. The leadership is full of liars and hypocrites. And you think Hamas took civilian hostages, the same Hamas that staged the black flag operation that destroyed Gaza. All these provocations were carried out by Israel. Weren't phone and pager operations enough for you? Open your eyes already. When they come for you later, don't be surprised that you believe all the nonsense that the Israeli media is spinning, turning absolutely everything upside down!
                      9. 0
                        3 March 2026 14: 33
                        Quote: Bookinist69
                        And according to you, Hamas took civilian hostages—the same Hamas that staged the black flag operation that destroyed Gaza. All these provocations were carried out by Israel.

                        What nonsense
                      10. -2
                        3 March 2026 14: 37
                        Stupidity is denying the reality of events that have occurred. I have everything for you... alas. My attempts to convince you otherwise were stupid. Bottom line: An idiot will never understand that he is an idiot, because he is an idiot! Farewell.
                      11. +1
                        3 March 2026 19: 33
                        What nonsense

                        This is much worse...
                      12. +1
                        3 March 2026 15: 07
                        Only idiots could believe that the 2023 attack was actually orchestrated by Israel itself. For one thing, the attack cost the careers of the entire Israeli intelligence leadership and a good half of the army's leadership.
                        Regarding Iran's strikes, Iran has nothing really to offer, so they're attacking all their neighbors, hoping that the Arabs, who aren't particularly supportive of the war, will pressure the Americans and everything will end faster than the "heirs" to power in Iran. Saddam tried something similar (he attacked Israel, trying to force it to join the war and thus end Arab support for the war), but it didn't work. Or maybe the Iranians are completely reckless, willing to die just to kill a few Jews (because I'm almost certain there's a missile or drone for every new, intractable leader).
                        If the Hezbollahs sit quietly, Israel will most likely stop at demonstrating force in Lebanon; it seems to me that they have no time for them now (by the way, the locals themselves would strangle the Hezbollahs, but they don’t want a civil war again).
                        P.S.: You can sympathize very, very much with the Persians, but the current government is doomed. If not in the next few weeks or months, then in the next three to five years. The question remains how much of a negative impact this will have on the region and the world...
                      13. -1
                        3 March 2026 18: 20
                        If you want to figure out who orchestrated the 2023 provocation, start with the simplest questions. What was the event? What was its cause, and who financed it? If, after answering these questions, you don't see the obvious result (Gaza in ruins), then God be your judge. Start thinking critically...
                      14. +2
                        3 March 2026 19: 35
                        I agree, but conspiracy theories are in demand among a certain segment of the public, especially if they meet their desires.
    2. +5
      3 March 2026 10: 01
      Ayatollahs, spiritual leaders, have changed many times.

      There were only two. After the death of the first, Ruhollah Khomeini, in 1989, the now-deceased Ali Hosseini Khamenei assumed power; there were no others.
      Ali Hosseini Khamenei ... is an Iranian politician and Shia imam who served as the Supreme Leader of Iran from 1989 until his assassination in 2026.
  4. +2
    3 March 2026 06: 41
    IMHO, a change of power like in Venezuela will not work due to the lack of a single center of power.
    Even the armed forces are divided into parts: the army itself, the IRGC, and the Basij. Political power is also divided between religious and nominally secular bodies.
    The elites will not be able, IMHO, to agree among themselves and the situation will continue "as is".

    As a result, strikes against Iran's missile and nuclear programs will likely continue. At the same time, following the example of Afghanistan, Syria will begin arming the opposition on the ground, with the support of its air force and special forces.
    The result will be the de facto disintegration of Iran into pieces that are of little danger or interest to anyone outside.
    It is a pity.
  5. +3
    3 March 2026 06: 49
    Author

    ...with the start of the operation, Donald Trump addressed the Americans... and directly addressed the Iranian military.

    To the members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the armed forces, and the police, I say: you must lay down your arms and receive complete immunity, or else die. So lay down your arms.



    Reminded me of Vladimir Putin's address to the Ukrainian Armed Forces command in February 2022: "Take power into your own hands...!"
    I wonder if this offer from Trump will be more tempting for the IRGC??! .... :))
  6. +8
    3 March 2026 06: 52
    Cool. But this morning. A bunch of articles about how the Iranians are taking out bases and equipment. And then suddenly a 180-degree turn.
    1. +5
      3 March 2026 08: 04
      Quote: Gardamir
      But this morning there are a bunch of articles about how the Iranians are taking out bases and equipment.

      Yeah, and they sank an aircraft carrier, my God...
      1. +4
        3 March 2026 09: 11
        On the one hand, I loved reading about the war in the 80s, when Iran and Iraq were butting heads. Some wrote that they suffered almost no losses, but the enemy did. And the enemy wrote the same thing, but in reverse.
        But now there are many third-party resources, for example, BakTV shows relatively neutral content.
        1. +2
          3 March 2026 09: 38
          Quote: Gardamir
          But now there are many third-party resources, for example, BakTV shows relatively neutral content.

          "Nowhere do they lie as much as in war." Here, it's not even that they throw in fakes (on both sides), but that they exaggerate successes.
          For example, yesterday I saw a description for a video about a suicide drone hitting an American base in Iraq. In the video, an American films the drone crashing behind a parking lot and exploding. That's it. He's impressed, of course, but in reality, it's nothing more than that. It exploded in a vacant lot, and shrapnel shredded some trucks at most. Horrible, horrific. But the news is saying, "Iran attacked a US base in Iraq!" and they're spinning it so much it's like Hiroshima happened there. So, the actual damage isn't nearly as terrible as they're making it out to be. We should know about this, because during the Second World War, there were so many claims about horrific strikes on our refineries and factories, but in reality, most of them caused relatively modest damage, more noise.
          1. +1
            3 March 2026 10: 03
            By the way, exactly the same thing is happening two thousand kilometers to the northwest of Iran.
            1. -1
              3 March 2026 10: 45
              Quote: Gardamir
              By the way, exactly the same thing is happening two thousand kilometers to the northwest of Iran.

              Well, it's always been like this...
              In just two years, the Mongols, led by Genghis Khan, conquered the entire Khwarezm Empire and killed 1,7 million people.
    2. +1
      3 March 2026 10: 12
      Quote: Gardamir
      And suddenly a 180 turn.

      Just look at the authorship. wink
    3. -1
      3 March 2026 13: 01
      Quote: Gardamir
      but this morning there are a bunch of articles about how the Iranians are taking out bases and equipment

      P.S.: Note: Iran is attacking US bases that the US does not use to attack Iran. This means Iran is using missiles and UAVs not to undermine the enemy's strike potential, but to vent its anger on its abandoned property.
  7. -3
    3 March 2026 06: 54
    It is absolutely premature to draw conclusions.
    It seems the US is bogged down in this operation, and now they will have to make a choice:
    - without forgetting about the destruction of command and launchers, to hit the infrastructure of electricity, water supply, bridges, take control of the Strait of Hormuz zone (and this is a landing and ground operation), create a puppet government in the occupied territory, etc.;
    - seek a quick way out of the current impasse, inflicting blows to prestige to mask the failure of the operation in the eyes of the Americans.
    As for Iran, it makes sense to stage a serious play to attract China as a supplier of weapons, specialists, and, perhaps, even as a theater command. But this is only feasible if Iran's ruling elite firmly maintains control, which looks doubtful in the long term.
    1. 0
      3 March 2026 07: 48
      Quote: Victor Leningradets
      It is absolutely premature to draw conclusions...


      True, everything will depend on the timing of the operation. If it ends quickly, it will be a resounding victory for Trump, but if it drags on... like the Russian-Ukrainian one, it could turn the entire region into hell...
      The United States, by destroying Iran's leadership, wants to change the political regime. Iran plans to use missile strikes to bring the region into a state of crisis and instability, and at the same time raise energy prices, destabilizing the global economy, ahead of Trump's crucial congressional elections.
      If these exchanges of blows drag on, this could become a prelude to a world war...
    2. +5
      3 March 2026 10: 31
      It looks like the US is bogged down in this operation.

      It's too early to draw conclusions.
      1. -1
        3 March 2026 11: 50
        A ground operation will be necessary (not to be confused with a grinding operation!). Obviously, targeted amphibious and airborne operations, with appropriate air cover, logistical support, and logistics.
        And then the democrats will join in!
        However, there are options with the latter.
        1. +6
          3 March 2026 12: 02
          "Allied Force" lasted two and a half months, and they also thought the US was bogged down. But somehow...
  8. +2
    3 March 2026 07: 02
    However, there is no information yet that the Americans have lost even one ship or aircraft.
    We've already written about airplanes.
  9. -2
    3 March 2026 07: 13
    The use of nuclear weapons by the parties to the conflict is particularly pressing. The US and Israel will use their own weapons in accordance with their stated objectives, while Iran will act as a proxy for China (though hardly for Russia). A nuclear provocation by Israel (such as a self-bombing of Dimona) cannot be ruled out.
    It makes sense for Russia to take an active position on this issue, rather than sit around waiting for something to happen.
    1. 0
      3 March 2026 07: 32
      It is doubtful that we will take an "active position" on the Iranian issue; "routine concerns" do not count.
      Our "esteemed partners" simply won't understand us, why would this happen? hi
  10. +3
    3 March 2026 07: 47
    Quote from tsvetahaki
    Quote: Uncle Lee
    The initial goal of the operation was to eliminate the country's top leadership and, probably, change the regime.
    This is a tried and tested scenario...

    Maybe it's worth learning some working methods of waging war? belay
    Suppression of air defenses, disorganization by eliminating commanders and key figures, destruction of everything that can be bombed?
    And then think - is it worth conducting a ground operation at all?
    But this is too capitalistic an approach.

    In that case, high-ranking generals should have the courage to reveal the real state of the army and navy. And given how much Shoigu's deputies stole, no one was willing to reveal it. Better to continue participating in tank biathlons and pinning medals on themselves for repeatedly capturing Palmyra.
  11. 0
    3 March 2026 07: 48
    From a legal perspective, this is pure aggression against a sovereign state. Justifications like the ayatollah regime doesn't recognize Israel's right to exist and is waging war against them are acceptable in regard to Israel, but not in regard to the United States. A complete reversion to the rule of law seems tempting from the perspective of those who wield power, but in reality, it will create a host of difficulties for the United States (the next administration will likely have to blame everything on "Crazy Donnie").
    From a military perspective, I agree with the author—Iran's strategy of attacking every neighbor with US bases and exploiting the economic consequences of war will lead to nothing but further enmity among these neighbors. But after the loss of the "axis of resistance" in 2021-2025, it seems simply impossible to propose a sensible plan for the ayatollahs.
    The most difficult part is the political part. What is the goal of the war anyway? To secure a more favorable deal on Iran's missile program, it wasn't necessary to eliminate the entire political leadership. If it's destroyed, then the only goal can be regime change. That makes sense, but why didn't they attack in January during the uprising? Let's assume they weren't ready. But a change of power (especially in a country like Iran, where the ayatollahs, although fanatics, are connected to their country) must rely on some organized structures within Iran that have their own ideas and support within the country. Even the Shah's son needs to be catapulted into Iran somehow, provided with security and military support, etc. Trump's official plan—let's bomb everything, and then the Iranian people will take to the streets and seize power themselves—is sheer demagoguery.
    Ultimately, the baseline scenario now is that the ayatollah regime remains in place, but will simply be forced to strike a deal with the US and Israel. But for Trump, that would be a defeat.
    The second most likely scenario is civil war and chaos in Iran.
    1. -1
      3 March 2026 08: 13
      Quote: Belisarius
      The next administration will probably have to blame everything on "Crazy Donnie"

      Well, it's already become a system for them, Donnie blames all the troubles on Biden.
      Quote: Belisarius
      Iran's strategy of attacking every neighbor with US bases and exploiting the economic consequences of war will lead to nothing but greater hostility among these neighbors.

      This will lead to all these countries allowing the US to use their territory to attack Iran, or taking an active part themselves. It would be more logical for Iran to concentrate its attack on one country, for example the UAE (though it doesn't matter), and destroy everything so that the others, terrified, would not even think of helping the US. But Iran's elders aren't particularly bright, especially since there are now three of them...
      Quote: Belisarius
      The ayatollah regime remains in place, but will be forced to make a deal with the US and Israel.

      Depending on how many of them will be sent to heaven.
      1. -1
        3 March 2026 08: 49
        Quote: Puncher
        It would have been more logical for Iran to concentrate its attack on one country, for example the UAE (although it doesn’t matter), to destroy everything so that the others would be horrified and not even think about helping the US in any way.

        After the destruction of the axis of resistance, they were left with two strategies
        1) Hit Israel first
        2) First of all, target US bases and block the Strait of Hormuz.
        They tried the first approach in the Twelve-Day War, and it didn't go so well. But back then, the strikes were limited. Now they're carrying out the second, adding all their Arab allies to the US bases. Again, there's simply no winning strategy for them, but I agree that concentrating all their forces on one country (if they've decided to target the Arabs) would have been more sensible. Or at least they should have concentrated all their forces on Israel to inflict any real damage. That would at least have been consistent with their stated goals.
        Quote: Puncher
        Depending on how many of them will be sent to heaven.

        That's why they made three, so they wouldn't send everyone to Allah at once. But the problem is that without a ground invasion, no matter how many they send, if there are no opposition structures within Iran itself, the government won't change on its own. The next rahbar will simply be more accommodating. Or else they'll need to rely on the Iranian army (not the IRGC) to effect a change of power.
        1. -2
          3 March 2026 09: 29
          Quote: Belisarius
          That is why they made three, so that they would not all be sent to Allah at the same time.

          Three doesn't mean one chief and two deputies, but three chiefs at once. Any decision must be approved by the three of them! That is, they must gather together! Even if we exclude the risk of simultaneous resets, the very fact that it would take so long to make a decision demonstrates the stupidity of such a structure. Three people are good for gathering around a bottle in the kitchen, but they're not capable of running a country during a war.
          Quote: Belisarius
          Or should we then rely on the Iranian army (but not the IRGC) to change power?

          Of course, power won't erase itself, but every country will have its own Napoleon who will have weapons and support.
          1. 0
            4 March 2026 00: 10
            Quote: Puncher
            It's all well and good for three to gather around a bottle in the kitchen, but it's not good for them to command a country during a war.

            That's true, but the three-man leadership (while the Rahbar is absent) is official. Who exactly is making decisions in Iran now, and how the power structure is structured there, is unknown. They should have been preparing for war and thinking through its structure. I don't think they're so stupid as to not understand things like the importance of speed and autonomy in war.
            1. -1
              4 March 2026 03: 36
              Quote: Belisarius
              Who exactly is making decisions in Iran now, and how the power structure is organized there, is unknown.

              They elected the son of the murdered man, Mojtab Khamenei.
              1. +1
                4 March 2026 04: 24
                Quote: Puncher
                They elected the son of the murdered man, Mojtab Khamenei.

                Brave guy. The new Minister of Defense has already been killed.
                P.S. Judging by this appointment, Iran intends to continue its resistance. It's unlikely the new ayatollah will kiss the gums of those who murdered almost his entire family.
                1. -1
                  4 March 2026 04: 39
                  Quote: Belisarius
                  Iran intends to continue to resist.

                  Certainly. It's a question of possibilities.
                  Quote: Belisarius
                  It is unlikely that the new ayatollah will kiss the gums of those who killed almost his entire family.

                  The question is how the pious will accept this appointment. According to the constitution, the Rahbar should be elected from among the faqihs, the highest ayatollahs. But he is not one of them. So, it turns out he inherited the position of Rahbar, albeit through a decision of the triumvirate. For religious fanatics, the canons are of great importance. Whether this will cause a schism is unknown. Perhaps they will turn a blind eye, citing the conditions.
    2. 0
      3 March 2026 08: 52
      The dizziness of the latter's successes got the better of them. They weren't prepared for such unfolding events in Iran, plus the operation against Maduro was being prepared, and they didn't want to spread themselves too thin. Even now, the US is constrained in terms of forces and ground operations in the Middle East, and China can't be left unattended and weaken the Asia-Pacific region. China, in turn, is providing targeting information for Iran, and the entire CPC is hoping for a boots-on-the-ground situation.

      The goal is and remains regime change, and Doni was right when he said that it won't work now; they'll take a break, fly back, and return in a few months.
      1. 0
        3 March 2026 11: 27
        Quote: Arkee
        China cannot be left unattended and weakened in the Asia-Pacific region. China, in turn, is providing targeting for Iran, and the entire Communist Party is hoping for a boots-on-the-ground situation.


        Militarily, China is simply a paper tiger. Although they have everything... resources, capabilities, etc., but due to the current mentality and an aging elite that is unable to respond to challenges and restructure the system to the current situation... China is doomed. We can laugh all we want at Trump's age, but he's just the tip of the iceberg. With Vance, Rubio, and other young people making policy, we can also evaluate the effectiveness of the Pentagon and the entire military machine, which fully utilizes AI in its calculations (modeling) and achieves the desired results.

        Returning to the topic of China... they simply aren't responding to changes. I don't know if this is due to national mentality, or fear (sanctions, direct war with the US, etc.), or maybe they're simply unable to keep up and are going with the flow, but it's a fact. Venezuela and Iran have already fallen (the latter, although still trying to bite back), but given the strength and resources of both sides, there's no chance in the long term. And these are countries that supplied oil to China... the consequences for the "One Belt, One Road" project remain to be seen; after such harsh US actions, there will be even fewer willing enemies.

        In theory, Xi could suddenly "wake up" and carry out an operation to retake Taiwan while significant US forces and resources are directed at Iran, but in reality... the thinking is different.
        1. man
          +2
          3 March 2026 13: 00
          Quote: Aleksandr21
          China, militarily, is just a paper tiger.

          That's not true. China is simply stubbornly pursuing its "monkey" strategy.
        2. 0
          3 March 2026 13: 30
          We're simply accustomed to the first Cold War, where the USSR, for the first half of it, didn't follow in the wake of the US and instead launched offensives all over the world: Cuba, Korea, Vietnam, China, the Middle East (albeit unsuccessfully), Africa, Latin America, etc.
          China, however, does not want to be drawn into a similar race, wasting already-needed resources. Moreover, the idea that the US can be outlasted economically still lingers in China's thinking, and that the planet's leading imperialist simply cannot handle the burden of responsibility that has already fallen upon it.

          I agree that they need to act stronger, faster, and tougher, but the Chinese leadership doesn't want that. Moreover, even if they lose their assets, no one is kicking them out. Look at Peru, they have a fascist anti-communist junta there, and so what? They invested money, built a port (now the Americans want to seize it, but that's not the point). Same with Argentina, and even though they were kicked out of building a telescope and space surveillance, are there trade relations? - Yes! Is Argentina dependent? - Yes! And what about rare earth metals? The US essentially asked for a ceasefire because they couldn't afford a second trade war, although Donya claimed otherwise during his first presidency.

          And you don't have to look far for examples of China's different way of thinking. Right next door is Myanmar, which Trump has his eye on in 2025. It's a given that intelligence teams of all stripes have already been sent there. But China isn't addressing this issue. They've resolved it entirely differently. They've reached an agreement with the junta and the rebels, and both factions aren't interfering with the flow of Chinese goods. Let them continue to fight with Chinese weapons, the junta with Chinese equipment, and the rebels with drones purchased from China.

          But it's worth noting that China is also building its second navy after the US, and at a faster pace than the first. They have plans for expeditionary forces and bases abroad. They are ready to fight for the South China Sea, where they have simply wrested it from neighboring countries—Vietnam, Brunei, the Philippines, and Malaysia.

          They conduct intelligence activities around the United States and its capabilities, landing a lot of Chinese spies, and they were able to steal data on the F-35 and then build the J-35.

          Just wait another 5-10 years. China won't be left with any escape route. Once they deal with Cuba, Iran, and Russia (which is basically the US's main objective and one of the reasons why the 2022 conflict began), we'll return to a classic Cold War. Meanwhile, one advances, the other prepares, and hopes the first one overexerts itself.
          1. 0
            3 March 2026 15: 10
            Quote: Arkee

            Just wait another 5-10 years, China will still not be left with an escape route, once they deal with Cuba, Iran and Russia...


            Exactly, but I'm afraid it will be too late for China. The Americans have already begun to take a long-term approach, now they're severing the "tentacles" and snapping at China's allies and partners one by one... Xi and his team are probably confident that no matter who comes to power (among their partners), they'll re-establish cooperation with China, but that's not the case. There won't be another Maduro or Khamenei, but there will be leaders who will look to the United States.

            And then, the preparations will begin... Syria, Venezuela, and Iran weren't broken right away; there were years of work, sanctions, and a deterioration in the lives of the population/elites, and something similar could happen here.

            Let's say in the 2030s, China begins an operation to recapture Taiwan, or the US simply decides to accuse China of all mortal sins (from COVID to undermining democracy), and imposes sanctions on our level, i.e., a complete blockade by the West against China. Then, trading partners (like Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, etc.) begin to abandon China, choosing the right of two chairs... and the result is a serious blow to the Chinese economy, a colossal decline in production (the closure of US/EU markets to Chinese goods), unemployment... and if we consider how willing the Chinese are to fight for their profits (protests against isolation during COVID), then clashes will ensue within the country, including among local elites... surely not everyone is happy that all the lucrative assets and power belong to Xi's group.

            Instability/coup d'état will follow, and goodbye communist China... a China modeled on Taiwan will emerge. With sanctions lifted and assets redistributed within China among the elites.
        3. +1
          4 March 2026 00: 27
          Quote: Aleksandr21
          In theory, Xi could suddenly "wake up" and carry out an operation to retake Taiwan.

          The balance of gains and losses for China will be negative. The goal of the war is not to satisfy ego, but to achieve a peace better than the pre-war one.
      2. 0
        4 March 2026 00: 21
        Quote: Arkee
        The goal is and remains regime change.

        They have a contradiction here, every day they talk about putting pressure on Iran, then about regime change.
        Vance said today that "the sole purpose of Trump's operation in Iran is to ensure that Tehran 'never acquires nuclear weapons.' But that is a completely different goal than regime change."
        These are two different strategies, and you cannot switch from one to the other during the course of the play.
    3. 0
      3 March 2026 09: 11
      Quote: Belisarius
      must rely on some organized structures within Iran

      And by the way, they are there. If we consider the triumvirate—the ayatollah, the IRGC, the president, and the armed forces—then eliminating the first link or taking it under control in a "secondary role" opens a window of opportunity for the other two.
      Quote: Belisarius
      having their own ideas and support within the country

      But this is secondary. The presence of an organized organization comes to the forefront. ATK Capable of controlling the situation. IRGC + cash flows - the Armed Forces, the president + numerical superiority. Who will be backed or who will be the first to "answer the call" - we'll see.
      Quote: Belisarius
      The second most likely scenario is civil war and chaos in Iran.

      Yes, it's "everyone against everyone" and "may the strongest win," and that's what we'll be dealing with. But how long this will take is a big question, and it's not at all in the US's interests.
      1. 0
        4 March 2026 00: 39
        Quote: Adrey
        And by the way, they are there. If we consider the triumvirate - the Ayatollah, the IRGC, the President, and the Armed Forces.

        These aren't opposition structures, but rather various structures within the current government. But I agree with you—their basic scenario seems to be the liquidation of the IRGC structures and the weakening of the ayatollahs, while the president (they're not touching him for a reason) and the army are strengthened and take over power.
        Quote: Adrey
        But this is already secondary.

        Secondarily, it's for seizing power, not for maintaining it. However, it's unclear how interested the US is in a stable Iran.
        Quote: Adrey
        But how long this will take is a big question and is not at all in the interests of the United States.

        If there's a civil war between the IRGC and the army, it won't last long. But if they completely overthrow the regime and, say, bring in the Shah's son, then that'll be a long-term thing. But all of that isn't so likely right now. For now, the regime is holding on.
        1. +1
          4 March 2026 00: 56
          Quote: Belisarius
          But if they completely overthrow the regime and, say, bring in the Shah's son, then it'll be a long-term thing. But that's not so likely right now.

          This (very obscene language) in Iran is definitely hated by many more people than the government they have now.
    4. +2
      3 March 2026 10: 19
      From a legal point of view, this is pure aggression...

      Not very clean actually.
      According to the Convention on the Definition of Aggression, the actions of Iranian proxies can be considered an attack.
      g) the sending by the state or on behalf of the state of armed gangs, groups, irregular forces or mercenaries who carry out acts of the use of armed force against another state that are so serious that it is tantamount to the above acts, or its significant participation in them.

      https://www.un.org/ru/documents/decl_conv/conventions/aggression.shtml
      Justifications like the ayatollah regime does not recognize Israel's right to exist and is waging war against them are acceptable in relation to Israel, but not in relation to the United States.

      There is Article 51 of the UN Charter on the right to collective self-defense.
      Overall, the Iranian-Israeli conflict has deep roots. They once had friendly relations, but then the situation changed.
      The Iran-Israel proxy conflict is a proxy conflict between Iran and Israel that has been ongoing since the early 1980s. The standoff involves not only the intelligence agencies of the two countries, but also numerous Iranian proxies in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Yemen.

      Before the Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979, Iran and Israel were considered allies—the countries shared close economic ties and a shared opposition to Arab countries in the region. After the Islamic Revolution in 1979 and the rise of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to power, Iran severed ties with Israel and began actively building an ideology based on opposition to Zionism and the export of Islamic revolution.

      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ирано-израильский_прокси-конфликт
      1. +1
        3 March 2026 19: 40
        Yes, but it vaguely resembles something familiar. winked
      2. 0
        4 March 2026 00: 31
        Quote from solar
        According to the Convention on the Definition of Aggression, the actions of Iranian proxies can be considered an attack.

        Perhaps in the case of Israel. But there's no need for proxies; they simply deny its right to exist. But not in the case of the US. Article 51 is completely inapplicable there.
        Incidentally, the persistent denial of US involvement in Khamenei's murder is connected precisely to this.
        1. 0
          4 March 2026 12: 14
          Perhaps in the case of Israel. But there's no need for proxies; they simply deny its right to exist. But not in the case of the US. Article 51 is completely inapplicable there.

          If
          In relation to Israel, it is possible.

          then Article 51 is quite applicable to the situation.
          proxy attacks, the Convention on Aggression equates to an act of aggression. And in this case
          Article 51
          This Charter does not in any way affect the inherent right for individual or collective self-defense, if an armed attack occurs to a Member of the Organization...
    5. 0
      3 March 2026 11: 27
      The second most likely scenario is civil war and chaos in Iran.

      Despite the decentralization of the ruling circles, a collapse scenario is less likely. The reason lies in religious education. Iran's ruling circles contain very few, if any, administrators and politicians who received a secular education in Europe or the United States. They are mostly all participants in the Iran-Iraq conflict and received their higher education in religious centers, which has greatly united them. Moreover, they are Shiites; with Sunnis, things are more complicated.
  12. -2
    3 March 2026 09: 18
    The fact that Iran's "elite" was effectively swept away, having previously demonstrated and yet again demonstrated passivity, may be for the best. A sick old man at 86—what can he do? Perhaps a kind of social elevator will bring forth young lions. For now, some of Iran's actions offer cautious optimism and serve as an example to some of the remaining old men in power of how to treat an enemy that is killing its people.
    1. +2
      3 March 2026 10: 08
      Well, yes, young 79 year old Trump is against it.
      1. 0
        3 March 2026 11: 50
        Well, yes, if they suddenly remove him now, everything will immediately stop according to this logic, right?)
    2. -2
      3 March 2026 10: 57
      Quote: Aleks
      Perhaps a kind of social elevator will bring young lions to the forefront.

      "The young one was no longer young..."
      1. -2
        3 March 2026 11: 52
        What did Putin say about beautiful phrases that cover silence?
        1. 0
          3 March 2026 12: 15
          Quote: Aleks
          What did Putin say about beautiful phrases that cover silence?

          I don’t know, I don’t have his quotation book.
          1. -2
            3 March 2026 12: 18
            As well as an intelligible commentary regarding the change of leadership
            1. -2
              3 March 2026 12: 20
              Quote: Aleks
              As well as an intelligible commentary regarding the change of leadership

              You don't know the ages of the triumvirate members?
              1. -2
                3 March 2026 12: 21
                I know the age of Khamenei's son, who is still alive, and I have been in the know for quite some time.
                1. -1
                  3 March 2026 12: 28
                  Quote: Aleks
                  I know the age of Khamenei's son, who is still alive, and I have been in the know for quite some time.

                  The country is ruled by a triumvirate.
                  1. -1
                    3 March 2026 12: 30
                    Well, yes, he reports to you daily, that's why you're so confident.
                    1. 0
                      3 March 2026 12: 49
                      Quote: Aleks
                      Well, yes, he reports to you daily, that's why you're so confident.

                      This is the official statement.
                      A special triumvirate will assume interim leadership of Iran following the death of the Supreme Leader, the IRNA news agency reported.
                      1. -1
                        3 March 2026 13: 03
                        Everything is clear, I won't bother you anymore)
  13. -1
    3 March 2026 09: 18
    The only thing that can be stated is that the United States has become a pawn in Israel's hands. This is where it became clear who is in control.
    1. 0
      3 March 2026 09: 43
      US national security is completely in the hands of Netanyahu and the radical right! And Israel itself is essentially an American military base!
  14. -2
    3 March 2026 09: 29
    Next, why does Iran need air defense? It's expensive and questionable, especially in a protracted conflict. The enemy will still carry out the necessary strikes. Moreover, bombing will anger the local population against the airborne invaders, which will only serve to unite the regime. The Iranian fleet is already damaged, so let's destroy its air force too – at least we'll be able to fly! Meanwhile, Iran's eastern bases haven't suffered any significant damage so far – nature itself is helping them. So, Iran is acting pragmatically right now, in my opinion. And that's encouraging.
  15. -1
    3 March 2026 09: 40
    How many chatterboxes and fantasists there are among the commentators.
    Iran will be put under pressure - that's clear... as is the fact that they will put pressure on it.
    The goal of the war is to seize control of Iran's oil resources. America simply cannot do otherwise.
    The reason is that Iran began selling oil directly, for example to China, bypassing dollar payments.
    And this is a fly in the ointment...commodity-money-commodity...anyone who doesn't use dollars or euros in payments is a criminal, from the point of view of the owners of the printing presses - and they know who they are.
    The conclusion is that the Russian Federation is next...
    Why? Because a significant portion of resource turnover is in national currency...
    So what's the point? Well, domestic consumers in Russia will be deprived of resources, while the resources themselves will be exported. We don't have to look far for an example: grain exports—its export became possible after the destruction of dairy farming and small livestock. In other words, the deep-sea people consume palm oil instead of milk, peas instead of beef, and shitty synthetics instead of wool.
    But this is just the beginning - the cost of electricity has already increased, followed by an increase in utilities, fuel... and taxes, of course...
    The Economist: Russia offered the US its biggest deal yet in exchange for lifting sanctions
    The West believes that the deal between Russia and the US could reach a value of 12 trillion dollars.
    WWW.KP.RU: https://www.kp.ru/online/news/6826300/
  16. +1
    3 March 2026 09: 40
    Trump is throwing strategic air power into the fray! The war of attrition has begun! Let's see if Iran has the stamina.
  17. +3
    3 March 2026 09: 40
    This is called "one of the healthy people's own." They weren't prepared and didn't interfere during the local uproar; they prepared and began to "endure" the country's military and everything else that is supposed to be "endured" in such cases—logically. That's where the logic of the Lao leadership came from on February 24, 2042, when columns march without cover, unprepared rear areas, etc.—a big question for a small company, a huge question. Yes
    1. +1
      3 March 2026 10: 34
      Reagan collected Soviet jokes, and Trump read Chonkin.
      “The people have long since gathered,” Kilin reported joyfully and winked at the chairman.
      "Well, that's good," Borisov purred. "Good..." he repeated, less confidently. And then he caught himself: "I misunderstood!"
      "What didn't you understand?" Kilin asked in surprise.
      – I didn’t understand how the people gathered, what kind of people, who gathered them.
      "Nobody gathered us," Kilin said. "We gathered ourselves. Would you believe it? As soon as they heard the radio, they came running: men, old men, women and children..."
      As he said this, Kilin sensed that Borisov was somehow dissatisfied with his message (Kilin himself was already dissatisfied with it for some reason), and without finishing his solemn phrase, he suddenly fell silent.

      "So," Borisov said thoughtfully. "So, so. So, you heard it yourself, you came running... Look, my dear, you wait for me and don't hang up yet..."
      .... Finally, something in the receiver grunted and slapped in the distance, and Borisov’s insinuating voice broke in again:
      - Listen, my chintz friend, do you have your party card with you?
      "Of course, Sergei Nikanorych," Kilin assured. "Always, as it should be, in the left pocket."
      "Very well," Borisov approved. "Get on your horse and hurry to the district committee. And take your ticket."
      “Why?” Kilin didn’t understand.
      - Put it on the table...
      "For what, Sergei Nikanorych?" Kilin asked in a low voice. "What did I do?"
      "You've created anarchy, that's what you've done!" Borisov's words dropped like leaden drops. "Where have you ever seen people gather on their own without any oversight from the leadership?"
      Kilin felt his insides go cold.
      - But, Sergei Nikanorych, you yourself... you yourself said: a spontaneous rally...
      "The elements, Comrade Kilin, must be controlled!" Borisov snapped.
  18. +1
    3 March 2026 10: 40
    Quote from tsvetahaki
    Maybe it's worth learning some working methods of waging war?
    Suppression of air defenses, disorganization by eliminating commanders and key figures, destruction of everything that can be bombed?
    And then think - is it worth conducting a ground operation at all?
    But this is too capitalistic an approach.

    I disagree. We've been observing a capitalist approach for the past four years. And in Iran, it's a classic case of coercive warfare.
  19. -3
    3 March 2026 14: 16
    In fact, Iran, facing strategic superiority in all weapons, has chosen the only correct tactic: attacking the economies of American satellites in the region and using cheap drones to overrun the Arab states' anti-aircraft missiles. It's a brilliant move, essentially! The US military is well protected; destroying an aircraft carrier without bastions is very, very difficult, and even with bastions, it's likely not so easy. But using $20-a-piece drones to take out the oil infrastructure of the Gulf states—that's simply brilliant!
    And if they also manage to sink some Pindos ship, there will be applause.
  20. +4
    3 March 2026 18: 14
    Quote: Bearded
    They targeted the school specifically. They targeted it deliberately. They killed 165 elementary school girls. It was intended to intimidate Iranians, but it backfired violently.
    This is a carefully planned war crime. Someone, after all, personally entered the flight mission and target coordinates. And this on the very first day of the war.
    It is obvious that the US goal in this war is to seize Iranian oil, rob the Iranians, and make them its slaves.

    A "kindergarten preparatory group"-level analyst or a "TV expert." Which is essentially the same thing.
  21. +2
    3 March 2026 19: 14
    Someone in 2022 scared everyone with the dire consequences of intervention in the Ukrainian conflict, as well as attacks on decision-making centers.
  22. +1
    4 March 2026 07: 28
    Advice for Iran based on our experience: Provide security guarantees to the Israeli and American military-political leadership. Do not attack decision-making centers. Do not attack headquarters. Do not attack logistics. Do not attack communications systems. Continue to request negotiations daily.
  23. 0
    8 March 2026 11: 54
    Written for the sake of writing. About nothing. The author only writes on fences, around construction sites.
  24. 0
    8 March 2026 12: 05
    The Americans have set about destroying, or at best subordinating, one of the key players in the energy market. And they're doing this through the hands of one of the key players in this nexus. Essentially, the same thing is happening as in Europe, where overfed elites have lost the ability to soberly assess both the present and the future developments. Moreover, the imbalance of life-sustaining resources in these countries will trigger migration and a host of other related processes, leading to new conflicts. When a shepherd leads a flock of thirsty sheep to a source of water, he doesn't tell them that they are being led to take away what they are being kept for.
  25. 0
    8 March 2026 18: 02
    Iran's former leader was understandable and predictable, but what to do with the new leader is still a question.