Latest news with #USMilitarySupport
Sky News
20 hours ago
- Politics
- Sky News
What happens next after US strikes is largely in Iran's control - but there are no good choices
As the sun rises above Jerusalem this morning, Israelis will be waking to the news that America has joined their war and attacked Iran. It will be met with mixed feelings. While the new day brings a comfort in US military support there will also be deep trepidation that this war has entered a dangerous and potentially uncontrollable phase. Benjamin Netanyahu released a video statement praising the US president and saying peace comes through strength; Donald Trump addressed the American nation and warned Iran he would not hesitate to order further action if it retaliates. What happens next is largely in Iran's control. What they choose to do, will determine the future of this region. The question is now not whether they will respond, but how? 1:45 Iran has faced a humiliating pounding from Israeli jets over nine days and now suffered massive attacks on their celebrated nuclear facilities by a country they call "The Great Satan"; there will be a feeling of national humiliation and anger, and the government will need to show its people it remains strong. Developing a nuclear programme has taken many decades and comes at vast cost: billions and billions of dollars and heavy international sanctions. That all now lies in tatters. How does the government explain that to its people, many of whom have suffered at the expense of these grand ambitions and are opposed to the draconian leadership they live under? Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is often described as the world's longest-serving dictator. He hasn't survived by being reckless but even though the US strikes weren't aimed at regime change, Khamanei's future is now more precarious than ever. The government rhetoric and state television channels will promise fire and victory, but the reality isn't simple. There will be voices close to the Supreme Leader, especially in the Revolutionary Guard, encouraging a strong response. The moderates will likely urge caution, wary of dragging the US into a wider, more sustained conflict that Iran couldn't win. It's unclear how much more Iran can throw at Israel. Ballistic missiles have been fired at the country every day since the war began, but in decreasing numbers as Israel has systematically targeted launch sites and stockpiles. Iran's proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas, are severely degraded and the Assad regime in Syria is no more. This was all supposed to be the first line of defence, a deterrence against an Israel attack. That shield has collapsed. The Houthis remain defiant but their firepower is limited. 1:44 The US attacks were against Iran's nuclear sites, not senior Iranian officials. Strikes on US bases in the region would therefore be the most logical 'like-for-like' response. If they choose to widen the conflict, Iran could now target oil facilities in the Gulf or try to close off the globally important Strait of Hormuz. Either of those options would have international consequences. 2:48 Shia militia in Iraq could be hard to control if they decide to act unilaterally. Iraqi security forces have reportedly surrounded the US Embassy in Baghdad in anticipation of violence. There is a possibility Iran could do something smaller and symbolic as a way of saving face, having the final word and giving the region an off-ramp. That will be the hope in Washington. But even in that best-case scenario, it will surely have to be something more than a token response; Iran is reeling, severely weakened internally and externally. If they escalate, they risk a severe US response that could be a death blow. If they capitulate, the government faces major domestic dissent and reputational damage from which it might never recover.
Sky News
a day ago
- Politics
- Sky News
What happens next is largely in Iran's control - but there are no good choices
As the sun rises above Jerusalem this morning, Israelis will be waking to the news that America has joined their war and attacked Iran. It will be met with mixed feelings. For the first night in over a week there was no Iranian missile attack on Israel, but while the new day brings a comfort in US military support there will also be deep trepidation that this war has entered a dangerous and potentially uncontrollable phase. Benjamin Netanyahu released a video statement praising the US president and saying peace comes through strength; Donald Trump addressed the American nation and warned Iran he would not hesitate to order further action if it retaliates. What happens next is largely in Iran's control. What they choose to do, will determine the future of this region. The question is now whether they will respond, but how? 2:48 Iran has faced a humiliating pounding from Israeli jets over nine days and now suffered massive attacks on their celebrated nuclear facilities by a country they call "The Great Satan"; there will be a feeling of national humiliation and anger, and the government will need to show its people it remains strong. Developing a nuclear programme has taken many decades and comes at vast cost: billions and billions of dollars and heavy international sanctions. That all now lies in tatters. How does the government explain that to its people, many of whom have suffered at the expense of these grand ambitions and are opposed to the draconian leadership they live under? Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is often described as the world's longest-serving dictator. He hasn't survived by being reckless but even though the US strikes weren't aimed at regime change, Khamanei's future is now more precarious than ever. The government rhetoric and state television channels will promise fire and victory, but the reality isn't simple. There will be voices close to the Supreme Leader, especially in the Revolutionary Guard, encouraging a strong response. The moderates will likely urge caution, wary of dragging the US into a wider, more sustained conflict that Iran couldn't win. It's unclear how much more Iran can throw at Israel. Ballistic missiles have been fired at the country every day since the war began, but in decreasing numbers as Israel has systematically targeted launch sites and stockpiles. Iran's proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas, are severely degraded and the Assad regime in Syria is no more. This was all supposed to be the first line of defence, a deterrence against an Israel attack. That shield has collapsed. The Houthis remain defiant but their firepower is limited. 1:44 The US attacks were against Iran's nuclear sites, not senior Iranian officials. Strikes on US bases in the region would therefore be the most logical 'like-for-like' response. If they choose to widen the conflict, Iran could now target oil facilities in the Gulf or try to close off the globally important Strait of Hormuz. Either of those options would have international consequences. Shia militia in Iraq could be hard to control if they decide to act unilaterally. Iraqi security forces have reportedly surrounded the US Embassy in Baghdad in anticipation of violence. There is a possibility Iran could do something smaller and symbolic as a way of saving face, having the final word and giving the region an off-ramp. That will be the hope in Washington. But even in that best-case scenario, it will surely have to be something more than a token response; Iran is reeling, severely weakened internally and externally. If they escalate, they risk a severe US response that could be a death blow. If they capitulate, the government faces major domestic dissent and reputational damage from which it might never recover.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Iran air strikes: Republicans split over support for Trump and another ‘foreign war'
After returning early from the G7 summit in Canada, Donald Trump met with his national security team to be briefed on the escalating Israel-Iran conflict. It became clear that Trump was considering direct US military support for the Israelis. This has the potential to cause a split among the president's supporters between the Republican hawks (traditional interventionists) on one side and the Maga isolationists on the other. During his three presidential campaigns, Trump condemned former presidents for leading America into 'ridiculous endless wars'. This isolationist tilt won him plaudits with his base of those who supported him for his populist promises to 'make America great again' (Maga). In their work on US attitudes to foreign policy and US overseas involvement, Elaine Kamarck and Jordan Muchnick of the Brookings Institution – a non-profit research organisation in Washington – looked at a range of evidence in 2023. Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK's latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences. They found Republicans supporting less global involvement from the US had increased from 40% to 54% from 2004 to 2017. At that time only 16% of voters supported increasing US troop presence abroad, and 40% wanted a decrease, they found. They related this change in attitudes to Trump's foreign policy position. Fast forward to his second term, and many in the Maga camp are fiercely opposed to Trump's current posturing about leading the US into another conflict in the Middle East. Over the past few days the White House has doubled down on the line that Trump keeps repeating: 'Iran can not have a nuclear weapon'. As Trump edges closer to committing the US to joining Israel in air strikes on Iran, Steve Bannon, a staunch Trump ally, argued that allowing the 'deep state' to drive the US into conflict with Iran would 'blow up' the coalition of Trump support. Meanwhile, Conservative podcaster Tucker Carlson denounced those Republicans supporting action against Iran as 'warmongers' and said they were encouraging the president to drag the US into a war. Congresswoman Majorie Taylor Greene, in an unusual break with Trump, openly criticised the president's stance on the Israel-Iran conflict, writing on X: 'Foreign wars/intervention/regime change put America last, kill innocent people, are making us broke, and will ultimately lead to our destruction.' Other prominent Republican senators, including Josh Hawley and Rand Paul, have urged the president to avoid US involvement in an offensive against Iran. Another Republican congressman, Thomas Massie, has gone even further. He has joined with a coalition of Democrats in filing a House resolution under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which would seek to prevent Trump from engaging in 'unauthorized hostilities' with Iran without Congressional consent. These Republicans may believe their views are popular with their electoral base. In an Economist/YouGov poll in June 2025, 53% of Republicans stated that they did not think the US military should get involved in the conflict between Israel and Iran. But Donald Trump does seem to enjoy widespread support in the US for his position that the US cannot allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. According to CNN data analysis, 83% of Republicans, 79% independents, and 79% of Democrats, agree with the president's position on this issue. This slightly confusing split suggests there could be US voter support for air strikes, but it's clear there would not be that same support for troops on the ground. IranInfogram Resistance from ultra-Trump die-hards, however, might put them on the wrong side of the president in the long-term. Greg Sargent, a writer at The New Republic magazine, believes that, 'people become enemies of Trump not when they substantively work against some principle he supposedly holds dear, but rather when they publicly criticize him … or become an inconvenience in any way'. So why is Trump, to the dismay of many from within the Maga faithful, seemingly abandoning the anti-war tenet of his 'America first' doctrine? Jacob Heilbrunn, editor of The National Interest magazine, thinks that 'now that Israel's assault on Iran appears to be successful, Trump wants in on the action'. The president has several prominent Republican hawks urging him to do exactly that, and order the US Air Force to deploy their 'bunker-buster bombs'' to destroy Iran's underground arsenals. One of these is Senator Lindsey Graham. Earlier this week on Fox News, he told Trump to be "all in … in helping Israel eliminate the nuclear threat. If we need to provide bombs to Israel, provide bombs. If we need to fly planes with Israel, do joint operations.' Former Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell is also advocating US military action. He told CNN: 'What's happening here is some of the isolationist movement led by Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon are distressed we may be helping the Israelis defeat the Iranians,' adding that its 'been kind of a bad week for the isolationists' in the party. The same Economist/YouGov poll mentioned earlier showed that the stance taken by these Republicans – that Iran poses a threat to the US – is a position shared by a majority of GOP voters, with 69% viewing Iran as either an immediate and serious threat to the US, or at least somewhat of a serious threat. Some believe that Trump's evolving attitude towards American military involvement in the worsening crisis in the Middle East, however, is not a volte-face on isolationism, or an ideological pivot to the virtues of attacking Iran. Ross Douthat of the New York Times has observed that Trump 'has never been a principled noninterventionist' and that 'his deal-making style has always involved the threat of force as a crucial bargaining chip'. It is always difficult to fully determine what Trump's foreign policy doctrine actually is. It is useful, however, to reflect on some of the president's overseas actions from his first term. In April 2018, following a suspected chemical weapons attack by the forces of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad in a Damascus suburb, Trump ordered US air strikes in retaliation for what he called an 'evil and despicable attack' that left 'mothers and fathers, infants and children thrashing in pain and gasping for air'. This led the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic magazine, Jeffrey Goldberg, to describe Trump as 'something wholly unique in the history of the presidency: an isolationist interventionist'. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. Richard Hargy does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Time of India
4 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Israel's Air Defences Critically Low Amid Iran Attacks, Claims US Report; ‘Iron Dome Overwhelmed'
Israel's air defense systems are approaching critical depletion amid continuous missile and drone barrages from Iran, according to The Washington Post. The country may only sustain its current defense pace for 10 to 12 more days without urgent resupply or deeper U.S. military involvement. The report comes after Tehran unleashed successive waves of attacks following Israel's preemptive strike last Friday, aimed at halting Iran's alleged nuclear ambitions. The Arrow system is Israel's main shield against ballistic missiles, but its costly and limited interceptor stockpile is being rapidly exhausted. U.S. forces are reportedly assisting, while President Trump has hinted at joining Israel's offensive, drawing sharp warnings from Tehran of 'irreparable' consequences.#IsraelIranConflict #MiddleEastTensions #MissileDefense #IronDome #ArrowSystem #DavidSling #IranMissiles #IsraelUnderAttack #IranVsIsrael #USMilitarySupport Read More
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Israel-Iran Conflict Enters Sixth Day as Trump Weighs Options
(Bloomberg) -- Iran and Israel exchanged fire for a sixth day after US President Donald Trump met with his national security team to discuss the escalating conflict, fueling fresh speculation that Washington is on the verge of joining the attacks. Security Concerns Hit Some of the World's 'Most Livable Cities' As Part of a $45 Billion Push, ICE Prepares for a Vast Expansion of Detention Space How E-Scooters Conquered (Most of) Europe Taser-Maker Axon Triggers a NIMBY Backlash in its Hometown JFK AirTrain Cuts Fares 50% This Summer to Lure Riders Off Roads The meeting in the US capital on Tuesday lasted more than an hour, according to people familiar with the matter. Trump spoke with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu afterwards, according to a White House official. No further official comments were made. American weapons are seen as crucial to achieving a more complete destruction of the Islamic Republic's atomic program. Yet while the US is Israel's closest defense partner and arms supplier, Trump has so far resisted calls from some political allies to join in strikes against Iran. For now, the US says it's only acting by helping Israel intercept missiles launched against it by Tehran. Before gathering his advisers in the Situation Room, Trump posted a demand for Iran's 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER' and warned of a possible strike against the country's leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. 'We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding,' Trump said on social media. 'He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now.' Both Israel and Iran indicated that they planned to continue strikes. The Israel Defense Forces said it had identified missiles launched from Iran toward Israel overnight and intercepted most of them. Early on Wednesday, the IDF said it hit a facility that made centrifuges for uranium enrichment. The New York Times reported that Iran was preparing missiles for retaliatory strikes on US military interests in the Middle East if Trump decides on an offensive campaign. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz told the country's public broadcaster ZDF that if Iran doesn't return to the negotiating table, then 'the complete destruction of Iran's nuclear program may be on the agenda.' Iran had been negotiating with the US for two months over a nuclear deal before Israel launched its assault. The now-suspended talks were about curbing Tehran's atomic program — which it insists is for peaceful, non-military purposes — in return for sanctions relief. Trump earlier Tuesday posted on social media that 'we now have complete and total control of the skies over Iran,' crediting US military equipment for helping Israel gain air superiority. His vice president, JD Vance, said Trump was 'making clear to the American people and the entire world that the US policy is that Iran can't have a nuclear weapon.' 'There are many different ways and different options at the president's disposal for how to accomplish that policy goal,' Vance said. US stocks declined on Tuesday as Trump played down the possibility of a ceasefire between Israel and Iran, fueling widespread fears the war would spread to other countries in the energy-producing region. Oil climbed near a five-month high. Brent was steady at $76.40 a barrel in early trading on Wednesday. On Tuesday evening, the State Department announced that the US Embassy in Jerusalem, as well as consular sections in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, would be closed for the next three days. The US is moving more military assets to the region. The USS Nimitz aircraft carrier strike group is sailing to the Middle East ahead of schedule, marking the first significant such move. New satellite images suggest Israeli strikes damaged underground uranium-enrichment facilities at Natanz, Iran's primary nuclear-fuel production site, the United Nations nuclear watchdog said in a post on X. The International Atomic Energy Agency has yet to detect damage at Iran's other underground enrichment site in Fordow, according to the statement. Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, a longtime advocate of war against Iran, said he '100% supports' US participation in striking Fordow. 'I'm all in for destroying their nuclear program. You can't do it without destroying Fordow,' he told reporters in Washington. 'If it takes bombs, bunker-buster bombs, so be it. If we need to fly with Israel, so be it.' Israel has sought to draw the US — which has provided defensive support against Iranian missile fire — deeper into the conflict. Netanyahu told ABC News on Monday that the countries share a common enemy in Iran, and that it's in America's interest to support Israel. Trump has left open the possibility of further talks on Iran's atomic activities after five earlier rounds, but continued to hammer the idea that Tehran is at fault for not having already agreed to a deal that would have prevented Israel's attacks. He told reporters that he 'may' instruct a high-level official, such as special envoy Steven Witkoff or Vance, to meet with Iranian representatives. Israel said it saw a drop-off in Iranian fire on Tuesday, with a military spokesperson saying 'a few dozen' missiles had been launched since midnight compared with the hundreds seen over the weekend. Still, Israel's Oil Refineries Ltd. shut down its refinery after the complex was damaged and three employees were killed, the company said Monday. The site has a peak production capacity of close to 200,000 barrels of oil per day, with 70% of products distributed in the Israeli market. Long-standing tensions between Iran and Israel erupted into open fighting last week, when Israel carried out surprise attacks on Iranian military and nuclear sites and killed senior commanders and atomic scientists. Since then, it has achieved air superiority over much of Iran, allowing it to bomb major cities and infrastructure at will. For Iran's government, the showdown poses a existential threat. It can't risk appearing weak, yet its retaliatory options are shrinking. Proxy forces it supports across the region have been largely degraded by Israeli wars since Oct. 2023. More than 200 people have been killed in Iran by the Israeli strikes, according to the last official tally from the Iranian government. In Israel, the government has said 24 people have been killed — the same number reported the day before — and more than 600 injured. Oil prices have risen in the past week as the conflict escalated, raising concerns about a wider hit to the global economy. Many analysts say Iran could choose to attack tankers sailing through the Strait of Hormuz, a key energy trade route. Qatar on Tuesday asked liquefied natural gas vessels to wait outside the strait until they're ready to load amid the escalating clash. --With assistance from Natalia Drozdiak, Alisa Odenheimer, Onur Ant, Jonathan Tirone, Dan Williams, Steven T. Dennis, Derek Wallbank and Erik Wasson. Ken Griffin on Trump, Harvard and Why Novice Investors Won't Beat the Pros Mark Cuban Has Done Sports, Reality TV and Now Health Care. Why Not US President? How a Tiny Middleman Could Access Two-Factor Login Codes From Tech Giants American Mid: Hampton Inn's Good-Enough Formula for World Domination The Spying Scandal Rocking the World of HR Software ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
