Hezbollah Targets Central Israel

The Lebanese group Hezbollah said Wednesday it carried out several drone and missile attacks targeting Israeli military sites and command headquarters in central and northern Israel.

In a statement, Hezbollah said it targeted with a missile the Dado base, the headquarters of the Israeli army’s Northern Command, northeast of the city of Safed in northern Israel.

The group said its fighters also targeted the Giv’a drone control base east of Safed with a precision-guided missile.

A swarm of attack drones also hit the headquarters of Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) in central Israel, it added.

Earlier Wednesday, the Lebanese group said it targeted a gathering of Israeli army forces at the Metula site in northern Israel with a rocket barrage.

Hezbollah said the attacks came “in response to the criminal Israeli aggression that targeted dozens of Lebanese cities and towns, including Beirut’s southern suburbs.”

The situation escalated in Lebanon on Monday after Hezbollah targeted a military site in northern Israel with rockets and drones in response to ongoing Israeli airstrikes and the killing of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in ongoing US-Israeli attacks on Iran.

The Israeli army launched a series of airstrikes in response, killing at least 40 people and injuring nearly 250 others. The military also launched a ground incursion into southern Lebanon.

Israel imposes strict censorship on reporting casualties caused by missiles launched by Iran and Hezbollah or intercepted by its defenses and also prohibits the circulation of related footage.

Israel has killed more than 4,000 people and wounded about 17,000 others during its assault on Lebanon that began in October 2023 and expanded into a full-scale war in September 2024. Anadolu

Continue reading
Iran War Costs US Forces $779 million on 1st Day

US forces spent an estimated $779 million, or about 0.1% of the entire 2026 US defense budget, during the opening 24 hours of its offensive against Iran, according to estimates and data compiled by Anadolu.

The US’ CENTCOM confirmed that the massive deployment included B-2 stealth bombers, F-22, F-35, and F-16 fighter jets, A-10 attack aircraft, and EA-18G electronic warfare planes. The operation also utilized MQ-9 Reaper drones, nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, guided-missile destroyers, and Patriot and THAAD missile defense systems.

Four B-2 stealth bombers, flying non-stop from Whiteman Air Force Base in the US state of Missouri, struck targets using 2,000-pound (907-kilogram) Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs), according to CENTCOM. Known for high maintenance requirements and a 40,000-lb (18,143-kg) payload capacity, the B-2 operations alone accounted for an estimated $30.2 million, based on flight hours, maintenance costs, and munition requisitions data from the US Defense Department’s 2025 and 2026 budget requests according to Anadolu.

CENTCOM’s buildup of various fighter jets of F-18s, F-16s, F-22s, and F35s contributed to the initial strikes, according to a post by CENTCOM on US social media company X. Based on flight hours, maintenance costs, and munition requisitions data from the 2025 and 2026 US department budget requests, these sorties cost an estimated $271.34 million.

Specialized aircraft, including the EA-18G Growler, A-10C Thunderbolt, and the MQ-9 Reaper, played a critical role alongside the Low-cost Unmanned Combat Attack System (LUCAS). When factoring in P-8 Maritime Patrol aircraft, RC-135 reconnaissance planes, and aerial refueling tankers, as well as land-based HIMARS batteries, the cost for the combined air and ground assets, including the fighter jets, reached approximately $423.57 million.

The two US carrier groups in the region, the USS Abraham Lincoln and USS Gerald R. Ford, also took part in the attack. The cost of operating the aircraft carriers along with their contingent of destroyers and littoral combat ships is estimated to come to $15 million a day.

Additionally, CENTCOM also released videos of its navy deploying scores of Tomahawk cruise missiles. While exact numbers remain classified, estimates suggest that roughly 200 Tomahawks were fired, totaling $340.4 million in munitions costs.

Combining these expenses, the total estimated cost for the U.S. strikes conducted last Saturday alone stands at $779.174 million, or some 0.1% of the 2026 US defense budget.

Continue reading
Scott Ritter: US Strikes on Iran is a Failure

The results of the Iranian strikes on US military bases in the region reflect a major miscalculation, according to former US intelligence officer Scott Ritter.

The US-Israeli military campaign effectively failed because it only killed Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and others, including his young granddaughter, but it did not topple the regime as US President Donald Trump had hoped for.

In fact, Ritter adds, the Iranians mourned their Supreme Leader and called for revenge instead of regime change, as America intended.

The strikes also failed to end Iran’s missile program. Ritter says Iran’s response was unexpected, as it bombed Israel, some Arab countries, and economic facilities, with disastrous consequences for the idea of ​​the United States’ ability to protect its allies, especially the Gulf states.

America will face a crisis. To prolong the war, Trump will need to amass more military capabilities, something military leaders warned him about before the war, telling him that its continuation would deplete US military equipment in the region, the former US officer says.

Ritter predicted that Iran would recover from the attack and that the United States would run out of ammunition. He said that the Gulf states should reconsider their reliance on Washington for their security, anticipating major decisions in the coming days.

For his part, Ali Larijani, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, said that his country, unlike the United States, was prepared for a protracted war. In a tweet, he added, “We will make our enemies regret their miscalculations,” in response to the attacks launched by the United States and Israel against Iran.

In the United States, Trump threatened Iran with a powerful strike, asserting that the “big wave” was yet to come and that he did not rule out sending troops to Iran according to JO24 based on Al Jazeera.

Continue reading
Gulf War: Slipping Into The Quagmire

By Ismail Al-Sharif

Despite the strength of the attack, Iran remains a large country; therefore, it will take four weeks, or less – Trump.

The attack on Iran was not surprising; the massive American military buildup was sufficient to signal an imminent military operation. However, what was unexpected was the breadth of the strikes and the targeting of the head of the Iranian government himself.

US President Trump explicitly called for the overthrow of the regime and urged the Iranian people to govern themselves, while the Zionist leadership declared that the military strikes and the assassination of leaders had created a climate conducive to political change within Iran. However, the lessons of history confirm that wars waged under the banner of regime change are rarely short-lived and often descend into protracted conflicts that do not end anytime soon.

Iran responded by targeting US military bases in the Gulf states and closing the Strait of Hormuz, through which approximately 20% of the world’s oil passes, as well as targeting oil tankers. This led to a sharp rise in oil prices, a development that poses a direct threat to the global economy and supply chains.

The Iranian military doctrine is based on the principle of asymmetric warfare. Instead of engaging in a conventional confrontation with US power, it employs strategies that confound its adversary, obscure its vision, make the course of the confrontation unpredictable, disrupt supply lines, and increase the cost of war for it.

One of the most dangerous escalation scenarios would be if Iran succeeded in targeting a US aircraft carrier. These carriers represent a stark embodiment of American hegemony and military might. Iran has developed anti-ship ballistic missiles specifically designed to target naval vessels, in addition to possessing swarms of drones and submarines that could be employed in such an attack. Any damage to an aircraft carrier, let alone its sinking, would constitute an unprecedented historical event, potentially opening the door to a dangerous escalation of the war.

Russia and China view the United States’ involvement in a protracted war as a strategic gain, but their direct entry into the fighting remains unlikely unless their vital interests are directly threatened.

This raises a fundamental and troubling question: Are we on the brink of a third world war? By its very nature, a world war requires the involvement of several major powers, which has not yet occurred. However, the entry of Iranian-backed factions such as Hezbollah, the Houthis, and affiliated militias in Iraq and Syria could open multiple fronts simultaneously. If the conflict drags on and Gulf states become involved, and Russian and Chinese support for Iran increases, tensions between the major powers could escalate. Escalation often begins gradually. One step leads to another, one response to another, until retreat becomes increasingly difficult. This scenario persists as the conflict expands.

The United States may find itself mired in a protracted war. Iran is not Afghanistan or Iraq. It is a vast country with a population exceeding 90 million, and its society is characterized by a deep-rooted nationalism and a profound hostility toward the Zionist entity and the United States, coupled with accumulated experience in confronting external pressures and aggressions. In such a context, war often serves to solidify Iranian nationalism and unify the home front against the external enemy. It should also be noted that the collapse of a state does not necessarily lead to peace; rather, it may lead to a vacuum that breeds chaos. Targeting the nuclear program does not mean the end of nuclear ambitions; on the contrary, it may push Iran to pursue nuclear weapons at an even faster pace.

Wars often begin with pronouncements brimming with confidence and optimism, but their threads soon become entangled and increasingly complex. In its initial stages, leaders believe they can resolve it quickly, but its outbreak opens a path to the unknown; no one knows when it will end. History teaches us that wars may begin with limited objectives, but they quickly expand and escalate due to miscalculations or escalating tit-for-tat responses. Thus, the United States may find itself embroiled in a protracted war with Iran, similar to its experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan, but undoubtedly far more complex and dangerous. Many analysts warn that this conflict could turn into a grave geopolitical blunder, undermining regional stability, draining resources, disrupting the global economy, and weakening American influence on the international stage.

Ismail Al Sharif is a columnist in Addustour newspaper. This column first appeared in Arabic and translated and posted on the crossfirearabia.com website.

Continue reading