2026 Israeli–United States strikes on Iran and elsewhere in region - News and Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jerusalem Post:
Although the majority of the IDF believes that Iran only has several hundred ballistic missiles left, which can reach Israel from its original 2,500 total, IDF sources have admitted to The Jerusalem Post that no one really knows for certain.

The exchange came after Channel 12 reported on Saturday night from air force IDF Col. "T" that the Islamic Republic still has more than 1,000 ballistic missiles left, directly contradicting the prior IDF estimate of several hundred missiles.
Click to expand...

www.jpost.com

IDF may not know how many ballistic missiles Iran has left | The Jerusalem Post

Part of the question for Israel is how many of the missiles, many of which have been covered in rubble, can be salvaged and are only temporarily inaccessible to Iran?
www.jpost.com www.jpost.com
 
www.theguardian.com

Worker for US defense contractor killed in Iraq as colleagues say they are pressured to stay

Man working for V2X died in night attack as five sources say they are being placed in harm’s way
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

TLDR: " V2X has told its employees in Erbil that the security situation is not severe enough for the company to arrange an evacuation. .... Employees were told by one senior manager that they would be blacklisted from being rehired by the company in the future if they were to leave."

"Despite the messaging to employees, several members of V2X management have departed Erbil, including the task order manager and site manager, who evacuated on March 24."
 
NMaude said:
Except that Ukraine has made sure that Putler and company profit from this by repeatedly carrying out drone and cruise-missile attacks on the two ports in the Baltic Sea and the port in the Black Sea.
Click to expand...

Correct Russian exports are down over 40% since all this mess started, due to intensified Ukrainian drone strikes.

Oil is up 50~60% in the same time frame.


Regards,
 
What Beijing Is Learning From Operation Epic Fury

oilprice.com

What Beijing Is Learning From Operation Epic Fury | OilPrice.com

A retired Australian general says the US-Iran war is giving Beijing a real-time window into American military power, decision-making, and strategic limits, with direct implications for Taiwan.
oilprice.com oilprice.com

Ryan says the Trump administration has demonstrated a critical limitation alongside its firepower: it can manage one major war at a time, and it has stripped out much of the institutional decision-making architecture that would normally govern a conflict of this scale. “These decisions look to be being made much more on impulse,” Ryan said, pointing to what he described as shifting and inconsistent strategic objectives since the campaign began.
Click to expand...

Regards,
 
galgot said:
Targeting/killing civilians and destroying civilians infrastructures is a warcrime, at time of war :
Click to expand...
Oil tankers are civilian assets as much as power stations and bridges are. Russia has targeted power stations multiple times in Ukraine, and in the middile of winter, which is clearly not just aimed at reducing war production.
 
Last edited:
How will Iran sustain these ballistic missile launches over say a 6-12 month period? Unless they are able to continue producing them somehow but doesnt seem safe having full production underground for such kinds of missiles.
 
lancer21 said:
Why do you keep bringing Russia oil into this thread? It has nothing to do with this war even by a stretch.
Click to expand...
One could argue it is somewhat relative regarding impact of Combat Military Operation on global economy. But good luck having a meaningful conversation with a certain group of people, which was shlurping whatever kool-aid Ukranian flags were posting on Twitter for the last four years.


------
The chief of intelligence in Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has been killed in a strike, the IRGC announces.
Majid Khademi served as head of the Intelligence Protection Organization of the IRGC and the Intelligence Organization of the IRGC.
In a statement carried by the Tasnim news agency, the IRGC announces Khademi’s death following an airstrike this morning.
Click to expand...

A $19.50 oil premium: Saudi Arabia sets record crude price as Hormuz crisis rattles markets
Click to expand...
economictimes.indiatimes.com

A $19.50 oil premium: Saudi Arabia sets record crude price as Hormuz crisis rattles markets

Saudi Aramco has set a record premium for its crude oil sold to Asian buyers. This move comes as disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz impact global energy markets. Iran's actions have affected oil flows from the Persian Gulf. Global oil prices have seen a significant rise. Fuel prices are also...
economictimes.indiatimes.com economictimes.indiatimes.com
 
Last edited:
slroger said:
How will Iran sustain these ballistic missile launches over say a 6-12 month period? Unless they are able to continue producing them somehow but doesnt seem safe having full production underground for such kinds of missiles.
Click to expand...
It won't. Its strike rate will just diminish to irrelevance. Like the Houthis, it will be capable of only disruptive actions.
If it wants to get more missiles, it will have to import. Either the production capability or the missiles as-is.
 
lancer21 said:
Why do you keep bringing Russia oil into this thread? It has nothing to do with this war even by a stretch.
Click to expand...
EmoBirb said:
Certain people are looking to turn this failure of the US against Iran into a failure for Russia too, in order to feel slightly less bad about it.
Click to expand...
Ha ! Because we are talking about this war, and one big consequence of this war is oil (Putin's main resource) prices surging, so the war in Ukraine can last longer, and it pisses me off.
There is no point trying to see failure for Russia here, because there's only net profit (again, "good" news for you ).
Moreover when :
Trump Removes Sanctions on Russia to Help Oil Flow Amid Iran Conflict.
Sorry to disappoint you tankies, I put putin, trump, bibi in the same bag of shit. With the IRGC in a bucket of piss next to it.
They are faces of the same coins. I'm certainly not on your "side" because I critisize US actions.
 
Last edited:
lancer21 said:
Why do you keep bringing Russia oil into this thread? It has nothing to do with this war even by a stretch.
Click to expand...

Because whether or not we like it the two are connected, Russia is giving intelligence to Iran and Ukraine is aiding the Gulf-states in defending themselves from Iranianian strikes, I strongly suspect that we're in the early stages of WWIII.
 
If Iran strikes one oil tanker every week, shipping insurance premiums will rise enough - if they haven't done so already - to stop oil tankers navigating the Persian Gulf. Drones, for example like the ones Ukraine uses against the Russian navy. Asymmetric warfare. US boots on the ground would be needed to effectively counter that. How long would the US want to sustain that?
 
Arjen said:
If Iran strikes one oil tanker every week, shipping insurance premiums will rise enough - if they haven't done so already - to stop oil tankers navigating the Persian Gulf. Drones, for example like the ones Ukraine uses against the Russian navy. Asymmetric warfare. US boots on the ground would be needed to effectively counter that. How long would the US want to sustain that?
Click to expand...
"Boots on the ground" i.e. a conventional ground invasion and occupation - is a longstanding but otherwise unfounded myth that should not be entertained for as long as the US has not set any operational objective that requires that.
 
NMaude said:
Because whether or not we like it the two are connected, Russia is giving intelligence to Iran and Ukraine is aiding the Gulf-states in defending themselves from Iranianian strikes, I strongly suspect that we're in the early stages of WWIII.
Click to expand...
By all accounts, there's probably way more relevant Ru weapons in Gulf now (like Pantsirs in Saudi Arabia) than there was even before June in Iran...
Big_Zukini said:
"Boots on the ground" i.e. a conventional ground invasion and occupation - is a longstanding but otherwise unfounded myth that should not be entertained for as long as the US has not set any operational objective that requires that.
Click to expand...
But that's the only effective way to open the Gulf properly.
Right now there's no way to even start proper traffic outside of Iranian protection. That requires destruction of IRGC flotillas underground(Iranian navy destroyed).
Going forward, there's need to establish protection against any coastal efforts to interfere with traffic - and depending on type(MLR-launched sea mines, ASCMs) - those go all the way into mountains; price/risk equation from Yemen has already demonstrated, that even mild threat and engagement tempo still keeps Iranian choking hold.

Strait is central to this war - and unless Tehran can be beaten into submission like Belgrad (which doesn't seem to be the case), there's no way around without boots on the ground.


p.s. on a different topic, away from geopolitics of war.
At this point it's honestly visible that Israeli Air Force, despite carrying out comparable number of sorties in high risk areas, operates much safer. US aircraft routinely ended up in sight/engaged/nearly missed/damaged, and it eventually produced airframe casualties.
Israeli aircraft were engaged off camera, but iirc just once it was seen on camera. No known damage, no shot downs.
 
Last edited:
Ainen said:
But that's the only effective way to open the Gulf properly.
Right now there's no way to even start proper traffic outside of Iranian protection. That requires destruction of IRGC flotillas underground(Iranian navy destroyed).
Going forward, there's need to establish protection against any coastal efforts to interfere with traffic - and depending on type(MLR-launched sea mines, ASCMs) - those go all the way into mountains; price/risk equation from Yemen has already demonstrated, that even mild threat and engagement tempo still keeps Iranian choking hold.
Click to expand...
The Bab was reopened without any ground component and with primarily an escort mission.

Every missile, drone, and personnel used in these strikes on shipping, is something they won't get back. They expend these permanently.
You might say this is some impossible war of attrition, but I remind that the same was said of TEL hunting until recently, and look how successfully that was done in this and the last war.
Additionally, there's no real high volume of fire coming from IRGC on the SoH. There are no dozens of ships struck every day. Ships are staying put because they're uninsured, and the US so far is not escorting them out.
Arjen said:
There lies the problem. Regime change? Something else?
The Israeli position seems to be to simply cause chaos in Iran.
Click to expand...
That is a very counter-productive assumption that clouds your judgments of things as they happen.

Regime change is an option and certain US+Israeli actions indicate it is an objective. But it is most likely an optional one, and even a significant degradation of Iran's DIB, arsenal, and nuclear program, will provide a substantial improvement in regional security and stability.
 
Big_Zukini said:
The Bab was reopened without any ground component and with primarily an escort mission.
Click to expand...
Bab was reopened by signing rather humiliating ceasefire with Houthis(which they felt free to break). Contested commercial traffic didn't resume before that, too risky.
Big_Zukini said:
You might say this is some impossible war of attrition, but I remind that the same was said of TEL hunting until recently, and look how successfully that was done in this and the last war.
Click to expand...
How exactly? Destroyed numbers go lower and lower with time, as it turned out that most destroyed were temporarily (and at great expense) blocked in shelters - or just waited out early surge in sorties. Number of launches is growing, and frankly there are growing signs that even their production didn't really stop.
Yes, Iran doesn't do stupid show launches like in their drama revenges anymore - but effects on ground are steady and consistent; if anything, they've grown.
Big_Zukini said:
Additionally, there's no real high volume of fire coming from IRGC on the SoH. There are no dozens of ships struck every day. Ships are staying put because they're uninsured, and the US so far is not escorting them out.
Click to expand...
There's no reason to strike something not moving. Ships which did try - were struck.
Big_Zukini said:
Regime change is an option and certain US+Israeli actions indicate it is an objective. But it is most likely an optional one, and even a significant degradation of Iran's DIB, arsenal, and nuclear program, will provide a substantial improvement in regional security and stability.
Click to expand...
Oh, there's ample evidence how stability has improved.
 
Arjen said:
Drones, for example like the ones Ukraine uses against the Russian navy.
Click to expand...
At least some of those Iranian 'drones' are likely a mix of missile and suicide boats, alongside manned minisubs. And mines are yet again proving their cost effectiveness.
 
Big_Zukini said:
Every missile, drone, and personnel used in these strikes on shipping, is something they won't get back. They expend these permanently.
Click to expand...
Sounds terrible for Iran. Unless they don't have to expend anything using the mere threat of such attacks.
Big_Zukini said:
Ships are staying put because they're uninsured, and the US so far is not escorting them out.
Click to expand...
Which seems to be the case. Weirdly enough, you seem to think that Iran strangling global economy, while propping up its own economy and ruining those midterm chances for Republican party in both Congress and Senate without spending their offensive potential is somehow bad for them. While it only means that it is Trump, who is under time constraints and pressure to resolve this as fast as possible. A prime time for either boots on the ground or TACO&damage control on social media.
Big_Zukini said:
You might say this is some impossible war of attrition, but I remind that the same was said of TEL hunting until recently, and look how successfully that was done in this and the last war.
Click to expand...
Was it, really? They are maintaining the same number of launches through most of March, at about 50 ballistic missiles and a 100 drones per day. Naturally, with production facilities destroyed or damaged, their supply will eventually dry out, but there is no telling how long that will take.
 

Attachments

  • photo_2026-04-04_13-38-10.jpg
    photo_2026-04-04_13-38-10.jpg
    76.2 KB · Views: 6
Arjen said:
Unrealistic without boots on the ground. In Teheran, not just the coast of Iran. Bloody unlikely. Very bloody indeed if tried.
Click to expand...
The IRGC's structure poses a serious challenge, but it is not impossible for a popular grassroots movement to succeed, especially if they get assistance in arms and coordination.
Arjen said:
US and Israel tried finishing that last year using only air attacks, did not happen.
Click to expand...
Degradation was successful. "Finishing off" the nuclear program was never an operational objective.
Ainen said:
Bab was reopened by signing rather humiliating ceasefire with Houthis(which they felt free to break). Contested commercial traffic didn't resume before that, too risky.
Click to expand...
The Houthis took serious beating. Their financial lifeline was significantly degraded when their main port was damaged along with its oil storage and tanker servicing facilities.
A ceasefire is the political continuation to a military operation. The military pressure succeeded. From then on, it's a matter of whether the coalition prepares for renewed fighting if it happens, or if the Houthis are left to reconstitute.
Ainen said:
How exactly? Destroyed numbers go lower and lower with time, as it turned out that most destroyed were temporarily (and at great expense) blocked in shelters - or just waited out early surge in sorties.
Click to expand...
The more you destroy - the fewer are left to deal with. It is only mathematically logical that the number of destroyed TELs goes down over time.
Assume you have 1,000 units of something. I destroy 50% per day. On the first day I destroyed 500. You have 500 left.
What is 50% of 500? 250. On the second day I destroy 250. Then 125 (50% of 250) and so on and so forth.

The method also affects this. We have witnessed over the last week or two weeks a surge in bunker busters used on missile sites. These could indicate the missile site components aren't simply buried, but perhaps demolished. There is no BDA for equipment destroyed in a UGF, at least in a manner you can display to the public.

Ainen said:
Yes, Iran doesn't do stupid show launches like in their drama revenges anymore - but effects on ground are steady and consistent; if anything, they've grown.
Click to expand...
They actually did a "show" launch just a couple days ago for Passover. Not coincidentally, a bunch more TELs were reportedly destroyed.
What are these "effects" you speak of?

By the way, since it's related, Iran has long ago shifted to cluster munitions. These are much less effective than unitary warheads. This points to significant demoralization within the IRGC, realizing they are failing to get past defenses so they improvize with largely symbolic attacks.

Ainen said:
There's no reason to strike something not moving. Ships which did try - were struck.
Click to expand...
Were they escorted? (no)

Ahriman said:
Which seems to be the case. Weirdly enough, you seem to think that Iran strangling global economy, while propping up its own economy and ruining those midterm chances for Republican party in both Congress and Senate without spending their offensive potential is somehow bad for them.
Click to expand...
No, I think it is beneficial to Iran in the short term. At least if their plan is the IRGC's survival. But if the IRGC survives, Iran will find itself in a post-war reality where the SoH is largely bypassed via alternatives Iran incentivized.

At some point, in the short to medium term, I believe it would be overall beneficial to escort ships through and let the SoH be opened again. But I can't deny the obvious advantages in keeping it closed for the short term either.

Ahriman said:
Was it, really? They are maintaining the same number of launches through most of March, at about 50 ballistic missiles and a 100 drones per day. Naturally, with production facilities destroyed or damaged, their supply will eventually dry out, but there is no telling how long that will take.
Click to expand...
That is not indicative of low attrition. It is also important to separate MRBMs and SRBMs, which this graph didn't do.
I do not follow the SRBM situation in the gulf, but I do follow the MRBM situation and there is a trend of decline there still.
 
Big_Zukini said:
The Houthis took serious beating. Their financial lifeline was significantly degraded when their main port was damaged along with its oil storage and tanker servicing facilities.
A ceasefire is the political continuation to a military operation. The military pressure succeeded. From then on, it's a matter of whether the coalition prepares for renewed fighting if it happens, or if the Houthis are left to reconstitute.
Click to expand...
You don't negotiate worse status settlement with someone whom you won against - and they don't block when they chose.
Same case as with Iranian "victory" in June.
Big_Zukini said:
The more you destroy - the fewer are left to deal with. It is only mathematically logical that the number of destroyed TELs goes down over time.
Assume you have 1,000 units of something. I destroy 50% per day. On the first day I destroyed 500. You have 500 left.
What is 50% of 500? 250. On the second day I destroy 250. Then 125 (50% of 250) and so on and so forth.
Click to expand...
I remember Israel destroyed 70-80% on the first day, and 80-90% on the second.
Now it's 50% of the initial, maybe.

At current launch tempo it means all remaining missiles will be launched, and if Iran somehow gets to produce more (which is possible) - they'll be launched as well. As such, Iran doesn't feel any need to compromise - their leverage won't end anytime soon.

On the other hand, switch to bridges and powerplants when force destruction goes well - and this is exactly what Trump does.
Big_Zukini said:
They actually did a "show" launch just a couple days ago for Passover. Not coincidentally, a bunch more TELs were reportedly destroyed.
What are these "effects" you speak of?

By the way, since it's related, Iran has long ago shifted to cluster munitions. These are much less effective than unitary warheads. This points to significant demoralization within the IRGC, realizing they are failing to get past defenses so they improvize with largely symbolic attacks.
Click to expand...
Not much of a show, but launching right after strike near Zoubin (south-western corner of the country) was indeed insulting. Reporting launchers after destroying 90% of them, which is now 50, is just that - reporting.
As a result they're getting through ~every day, and unitary warheads fly at ranges where they appear to be able to hit.
It isn't a win, it's opponent learning.
Big_Zukini said:
Were they escorted? (no)
Click to expand...
USN explicitly declined to escort ships through gulf. Who'll do that, Israeli navy?
I'm btw very much looking to a positive answer, every tank fill now is an exciting anticipation.
 
Big_Zukini said:
"Finishing off" the nuclear program was never an operational objective
Click to expand...
Yet another attempt was made (is being made?) to, err, diminish it. Try, then try again. And again.
Big_Zukini said:
The IRGC's structure poses a serious challenge, but it is not impossible for a popular grassroots movement to succeed, especially if they get assistance in arms and coordination.
Click to expand...
One can always wish. Right now, no sign of that.
 
Ainen said:
You don't negotiate worse status settlement with someone whom you won against - and they don't block when they chose.
Click to expand...
I agree that sometimes it's better to fight the long war and win decisively, but the airstrikes were producing diminishing returns, and there was no viability for a ground operation.
The most efficient way to root out the Yemeni threat would be a ground assault led by the Saudi and Emirati backed forces, with CAS provided by the coalition. But they were not ready for that.
And both the US and Israel had to pick their battles at the time.
And so, the conditions in Yemen favor a ceasefire.
Ainen said:
I remember Israel destroyed 70-80% on the first day, and 80-90% on the second.
Now it's 50% of the initial, maybe
Click to expand...
Please do not make up numbers. If you want to have a proper debate, quote the numbers given by the relevant defense officials.


Ainen said:
At current launch tempo it means all remaining missiles will be launched, and if Iran somehow gets to produce more (which is possible) - they'll be launched as well. As such, Iran doesn't feel any need to compromise - their leverage won't end anytime soon.

On the other hand, switch to bridges and powerplants when force destruction goes well - and this is exactly what Trump does.
Click to expand...
Iran's DIB was and still is being targeted, across all components. Missiles, drones, naval systems, air defenses, and their components and subcomponents.
Iran's ability to manufacture more missiles right now, is speculative at best.

Over the course of this operation we witnessed phases. It also helps that the IDF and perhaps even CENTCOM, also explicitly talked about phases.
Some times there were a lot of TEL and HIMAD hunting, then a lot hits on DIB. Then on IRGC/Basij. Then economic targets.

To properly degrade a country's all-domain capabilities, you have to strike tens of thousands of targets.
To do that, you set up a target bank. And you start hitting targets in that bank based on an order of priority.
It makes perfect sense that new types of targets start being struck only a week in, then 2 weeks in, a month in, and so on and so forth.
Ainen said:
USN explicitly declined to escort ships through gulf. Who'll do that, Israeli navy?
I'm btw very much looking to a positive answer, every tank fill now is an exciting anticipation.
Click to expand...
Now ask yourself why the USN declined.
There may be many answers. "Impossible" isn't one of them though.

Arjen said:
Yet another attempt was made (is being made?) to, err, diminish it. Try, then try again. And again.
Click to expand...
If I understand that things degraded can be rebuilt.

And if I hear defense officials talking about successive rounds (Israel v Iran) since years before the war, and on the first day of war.

Then why would I conclude that any single operation/war could lead to permanent destruction? There is no logical reason for that.
 
Iran’s top intelligence chief has been killed in US-Israeli air strikes a day after Donald Trump threatened to send the country “to hell”.

Majid Khademi, head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps intelligence division, was said to have been directly responsible for war crimes against Israel.

The US and Israel have killed dozens of high-profile political and military figures in Iran since their joint air strikes began on Feb 28.

On Monday morning, Tehran warned of a “devastating and widespread” retaliation to any US attacks on its civilian infrastructure if it did not reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

In an expletive-laden rant on Sunday, Mr Trump threatened to hit Iranian power plants and bridges if Tehran refused to end its blockade of the strait.

“Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one ... Open the f---ing strait, you crazy b-----rds, or you’ll be living in hell – just watch! Praise be to Allah,” he said on Truth Social.


Iran’s top intelligence chief has been killed in US-Israeli air strikes a day after Donald Trump threatened to send the country “to hell”.

Majid Khademi, head of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps intelligence division, was said to have been directly responsible for war crimes against Israel.

The US and Israel have killed dozens of high-profile political and military figures in Iran since their joint air strikes began on Feb 28.

On Monday morning, Tehran warned of a “devastating and widespread” retaliation to any US attacks on its civilian infrastructure if it did not reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

In an expletive-laden rant on Sunday, Mr Trump threatened to hit Iranian power plants and bridges if Tehran refused to end its blockade of the strait.

“Tuesday will be Power Plant Day, and Bridge Day, all wrapped up in one ... Open the f---ing strait, you crazy b-----rds, or you’ll be living in hell – just watch! Praise be to Allah,” he said on Truth Social.

Advertisement

But Iran’s military threatened to ramp up attacks, saying: “If attacks on civilian targets are repeated, the next stages of our offensive and retaliatory operations will be much more devastating and widespread.”

The Iranian navy also warned that the strait would “never return to its former state” and vowed to impose a “new Persian Gulf order”.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom