TRUMP'S GUNSEL

‘We’re Gonna Make a Ton of Money’: Unhinged Lindsey Graham Hails Profit Potential of Iran War

“We’re going to blow the hell out of these people,” declared the Republican senator.


US Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) speaks to reporters following a briefing on March 3, 2026.
(Photo by Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Jake Johnson
Mar 09, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

US Sen. Lindsey Graham, one of the most fanatical cheerleaders of the Iran war in Congress, on Sunday hailed the profit potential of the ongoing military assault, which has plunged the region and entire global economy into chaos.

“When this regime goes down, we’re gonna have a new Mideast,” Graham (R-SC) said in a Fox News appearance. “We’re gonna make a ton of money. Nobody will threaten the Straits of Hormuz again.”

Graham went on to respond dismissively to estimates of the massive financial costs of the war so far—roughly $1 billion per day, according to a preliminary Pentagon assessment—and warn of even more devastation in the weeks ahead. More than 1,200 Iranians have been killed by the US-Israeli onslaught so far.

“You just wait to see what comes in the next two weeks,” said Graham, who has characterized the assault on Iran as a “religious war” that “will determine the course of the Middle East for a thousand years.”

“We’re going to blow the hell out of these people,” the Republican senator said on Sunday.



The illegal US-Israeli war on Iran, which is now in its 10th day with no end in sight, has been a boon for American weapons contractors and liquefied natural gas giants, which stand to make tens of billions in windfall profits if the conflict and its reverberating impacts on global energy markets continue.

The Trump White House has repeatedly declined to provide a clear objective or timeline for the war. On Sunday, Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the president has not ruled out a ground invasion of Iran.

A classified report assembled by the US National Intelligence Council found that “even a large-scale assault on Iran launched by the United States would be unlikely to oust” the country’s “entrenched military and clerical establishment,” the Washington Post reported.

Israel Illegally Using White Phosphorus Against Civilians in Lebanon: Human Rights Watch

“The incendiary effects of white phosphorous can cause death or cruel injuries that result in lifelong suffering.”


Smoke rises after Israeli airstrikes targeted the Dahieh area of Beirut, Lebanon, on March 9, 2026. Israeli warplanes carried out strikes in the area, where explosions were heard following the attacks.
(Photo by Ethem Emre Ozcan/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Stephen Prager
Mar 09, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Israel is illegally using white phosphorous in civilian areas amid its new onslaught in Lebanon, putting residents at risk of death or life-altering injury, according to a report released Monday by Human Rights Watch.

The human rights group said it has verified and geolocated seven photos showing airburst white phosphorus munitions being deployed on March 3 over homes in the southern Lebanese town of Yohmor.

Images also showed civil defense workers responding to fires in at least two homes and one car in that area.

White phosphorus, a chemical substance that ignites when exposed to oxygen, is considered unlawfully indiscriminate under international law when deployed in civilian areas, as it can result in homes, agricultural areas, and other civilian infrastructure catching on fire.

“The Israeli military’s unlawful use of white phosphorus over residential areas is extremely alarming and will have dire consequences for civilians,” said Ramzi Kaiss, a Lebanon researcher at Human Rights Watch. “The incendiary effects of white phosphorous can cause death or cruel injuries that result in lifelong suffering.”

Human Rights Watch said it has not verified whether anyone was in the area at the time the white phosphorus was deployed or whether it resulted in any injuries.

It is not the first time Israel has been documented deploying white phosphorus in Lebanon. In June 2024, Human Rights Watch verified at least 17 instances of the chemical substance being deployed across south Lebanon since October 2023.

As of May 28, 2024, Lebanon’s Ministry of Public Health reported that at least 173 people had suffered injuries from white phosphorus since October 2023—including respiratory issues like asphyxiation.

“Israel should immediately halt this practice and states providing Israel with weapons, including white phosphorus munitions, should immediately suspend military assistance and arms sales and push Israel to stop firing such munitions in residential areas,” Kaiss said.

Yohmor was one of more than 100 villages where Israel ordered civilians to “immediately” evacuate last week—orders that have resulted in the mass displacement of more than 300,000 people from their homes, according to a Friday report from the Norwegian Refugee Council.

On March 3, residents of Yohmor and other villages given evacuation orders were told by Avichay Adraee, Israel’s Arabic military spokesperson, that they “should immediately evacuate [their homes] and move away from the villages to a distance of at least 1,000 meters outside the village to open land.”

Due to the “sweeping nature” of its orders, Human Rights Watch has warned that “their purpose is not to protect civilians, especially in the context of recent large-scale displacement of civilians in Lebanon.”

The report notes that between September and November 2024, more than 1.2 million people were displaced in Lebanon as a result of attacks across the country. Many, who were able to return home following a ceasefire in November 2024, have been displaced once more.

Since Israel and the United States launched a war against Iran last week, resulting in retaliation from the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, Israel has pushed further into Lebanon, carrying out attacks on several villages across southern Lebanon, the Bekaa Valley, and Beirut.

“Contrary to [Israel’s] claims, the strikes are not aimed at military personnel or installations, but rather at residential homes, medical responders, healthcare infrastructure, as well as women and children,” said Lebanese Health Minister Rakan Nasreddine on Sunday.

Since March 2, he said that Israeli airstrikes across Lebanon have killed 394 people, including 83 children and 42 women, while wounding 1,130 people, including 254 children and 274 women.

“The number is still increasing,” he added.

KAKISTOCRACY

Trump Sons Accused of Trying to Profit Off Father’s Iran War With Drone Investment

“The most corrupt family ever is profiting from all of the death and destruction Trump is responsible for,” said one critic.


Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. outside of NASDAQ in Times Square on August 13, 2025.
(Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)


Brad Reed
Mar 09, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

There’s no end in sight to President Donald Trump’s unprovoked and unconstitutional war with Iran, and two of the president’s children appear ready to cash in.

The Wall Street Journal reported on Monday that Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump are investing in a Florida-based drone company called Powerus that “is vying to meet fresh demand from the Pentagon” for drones that started when the Trump administration banned foreign-made drones and drone components from the US in December.

The company will soon be going public by merging with Aureus Greenway Holdings, a publicly traded golf-course holding company that is also backed by the Trumps, and is expected to make its debut on the Nasdaq stock exchange in the coming months.

“Investors in the deal include one of the Trumps’ investment vehicles, American Ventures,” reported the Journal, “and Unusual Machines, a drone components company where Donald Trump Jr. is a shareholder and advisory board member... Powerus is also a customer of Unusual Machines.”

In an interview with the Journal, Powerus CEO Andrew Fox predicted robust demand for his company’s products, commenting that the drone market “is certainly going to grow faster than, say, golf courses are.”

Eric Trump confirmed and defended his investment in the drone firm, replying to the Journal in a social media post that “I happen to believe drones will be a much better investment than companies that still print newspapers.”

Many critics, however, accused the two eldest Trump sons of seeking to profit off a war started by their own father. As the New York Times reported on Saturday, drones have become “a defining feature” of the Iran war, as they have been used by both sides in the conflict to launch explosives at targets at a fraction of what traditional missile barrages would cost.

“Rushing to cash in on Daddy’s failed war before they’ve even gotten Barron and Kai to enlist,” wrote journalist Marcy Wheeler. “Truly deplorable behavior, but what we expect from these corrupt reprobates.”

University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato argued that the Trump sons’ efforts to rake in cash from the war shouldn’t be surprising.

“Always a money-making angle for the Trump family,” Sabato wrote. “Why should the War with Iran be any different?”

Sabato’s words were echoed by fellow political scientist Norman Ornstein, who observed “it’s always about the grift” when it comes to the Trump family.

Melanie D’Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health, argued that the Trump sons’ drone investment should cast a pall across the entire Iran war venture.

“Reminder as Trump starts wars, sells weapons and bombs everyone,” D’Arrigo wrote. “The Trump family has a military drone company with military contracts, currently vying to meet Pentagon demand after the Trump administration recently banned new Chinese drones. The most corrupt family ever is profiting from all of the death and destruction Trump is responsible for.”

In 2025, at least two companies backed by Trump Jr. received contracts collectively worth hundreds of millions of dollars from the US Department of Defense.

Kedric Payne, general counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, said in an interview with the Financial Times last year that the government deals scored by Trump Jr.-backed companies look ethically dubious even if the president’s son didn’t directly use his influence to procure them.

“Presidents are expected to avoid even the appearance that they are using their office to financially benefit themselves or their family,” he said. “While we do not know for certain if, or how, the president may have influenced this loan, it falls under the cloud of conflicts of interest we have seen throughout this administration.”

Bad Bunny Turned the Super Bowl Into a Call for Land Sovereignty

Bad Bunny didn’t just choose a lush set design. He intentionally made history visible, reminding millions of viewers that colonial power doesn’t only claim territory, it reorganizes our whole environment.


Bad Bunny flies into the arms of his dancers.
(Photo by Kevin Mazur/Getty Images for Roc Nation)

Alejandro Díaz Loyola
Mar 09, 2026

Common Dreams

On the world’s biggest stage, amid fireworks and spectacle, there stood the crop that enriched empires while eroding Puerto Rico’s land, labor, and sovereignty.

When Bad Bunny opened his halftime performance walking through what looked like a living sugarcane field, millions simply saw a striking stage design. But those of us involved in agricultural communities saw a protest.

The Link Between Land, Culture, and Self-Determination

Sugarcane once powered Puerto Rico’s economy. Under Spanish rule and later as a territory of the United States, vast plantations consumed the island’s most fertile lands. Once diverse farming systems created by Taíno Indigenous communities gave way to monocultures designed for export. As with all colonial systems, wealth made in Puerto Rico has long flowed outward while the ecological and social costs remain for local people to have to bear.

Across colonized lands, colonial agriculture prioritized single crops for distant markets at the expense of ecological and social prosperity and resilience—a historical legacy that today ripples through communities and commodity markets. In Puerto Rico, as in other Latin American and Caribbean countries—including my own home country, Mexico—forests were cleared and watersheds were destabilized to power the colonial economic machine. Soil health declined. Local communities’ cultural ties to land were fractured, and, without power over local resources anymore, they could no longer steward landscapes as they once did. In Puerto Rico, US policies favoring industrialization over agriculture from the early 20th century onward were the final straw. Although Puerto Rico once produced most of its own food on the island, it now imports over 80%.

The image of sugarcane at the Super Bowl reminds us that land is political. It carries memories of exploitation, resilience, and identity.

What appear today as “degraded land” and disempowered communities are the ecological and social residue of economic models designed for extraction. So, in a very real sense, Bad Bunny didn’t just choose a lush set design. He intentionally made history visible, reminding millions of viewers that colonial power doesn’t only claim territory, it reorganizes our whole environment and, in doing so, reshapes culture, labor, and identity itself.

For many Puerto Ricans, the performance summoned the figure of the jíbaro—the smallholder farmer of the island’s mountainous interior, living from and with the land during colonial rule. More than a rural archetype, the jíbaro is a cultural touchstone, carried through generations in music, poetry, and oral tradition. They represent resilience and dignity, and an enduring bond between people and place—a vision of land not as commodity, but as home, heritage, and self-determination. Framed within Bad Bunny’s creative vision, land is not an asset class: It is identity and community.

Restoring Nature-Positive Farming Traditions Isn’t a Luxury—It’s Basic Risk-Management

Modern agricultural practices, many rooted in colonialism, have long degraded land by plundering natural ecosystems and extracting their value, often concentrating ownership in a few powerful hands. This has left us in a dire situation: At least 40% of the world’s land is now degraded, driving increasing food and water insecurity, contributing to climate change, and fueling climate migration.

To ensure our future on the planet, we must urgently prioritize land restoration and transitioning to regenerative agricultural practices. But for restoration to work, the governance model colonialism installed must be inverted. Landscapes cannot be regenerated without local decision-making power. Ecological repair and political agency go hand in hand.

As climate pressures intensify and public budgets shrink, we are seeing governments and businesses alike continue to act like ecological and social resilience is a luxury, an add-on after economic profit has been achieved. But safeguarding agricultural and ecological heritage, and placing power in the hands of local communities to be able to do this on their own terms, is a scientifically sound investment in economic resilience.

If we are serious about healing degraded landscapes—in Puerto Rico, in Mexico, across Latin America and the Caribbean, and beyond—we must ensure that the finance being used to restore does not become a new form of enclosure.

Research shows us that when communities have ownership and governance over local resources, restoration lasts. Yes, this demands real upfront investment—in soil, water, agroforestry, local enterprise, and strong community institutions. But the returns are massive: Every dollar invested in restoration can generate up to $30 in benefits.

If finance continues to channel value outward while communities carry the risk, we simply repackage (neo)colonialism in a greener language. Restoration funding must, therefore, anchor ownership and governance locally, positioning communities as architects of change, not passive recipients. And there are models already demonstrating what this can look like.

In Mexico’s Sierra Gorda, the Grupo Ecológico Sierra Gorda (GESG) has built a system where conservation and livelihoods are inseparable. Working alongside the state government, GESG has designed and implemented a public policy within the Sierra Gorda Biosphere Reserve where “forest owners” are compensated to steward forests, manage grazing responsibly, and protect biodiversity.

In simple terms, communities receive compensation for maintaining ecosystems that provide measurable public benefits—carbon sequestration, clean water, biodiversity conservation. Instead of extracting value from the land, value is generated by caring for it.

In the Sierra Gorda Biosphere Reserve, more than 300 people directly benefit from a PES (payment for ecosystem services) program covering over 14,000 hectares. GESG operates through a co-management model between civil society and the federal government, grounded in strong local participation and recognition. The goal is not short-term subsidy, but long-term institutional self-sufficiency through sub-national public policy—creating funding streams that sustain conservation while advancing community-led development.

It is a powerful example of conservation that reinforces, rather than erodes, local sovereignty. But PES alone cannot finance restoration at landscape scale; this requires a different kind of financial architecture. Regenerative blended finance offers one pathway. By combining public funds, philanthropic capital, and private investment, it can reduce risk and unlock larger flows of capital for landscape recovery. When designed well, blended finance mechanisms can accelerate ecological restoration while (and by) giving communities control.

A regeneratively-designed blended finance model treats communities as owners and co-investors, not beneficiaries. It embeds social and ecological returns alongside financial ones. It builds local financial capacity, enabling communities to negotiate, manage, and reinvest capital themselves, and strengthens local institutions so landscapes can ultimately generate their own sustainable revenue.The image of sugarcane at the Super Bowl reminds us that land is political. It carries memories of exploitation, resilience, and identity. If we are serious about healing degraded landscapes—in Puerto Rico, in Mexico, across Latin America and the Caribbean, and beyond—we must ensure that the finance being used to restore does not become a new form of enclosure. Only then will restoration break from the patterns of the past.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.


Alejandro Díaz Loyola
Alejandro Díaz Loyola is the landscape finance specialist at Commonland.
Full Bio >

Trump’s Incompetent War

Why did the US attack Iran? How long will the war last? What will the implications be? Don’t ask President Donald Trump!


Demonstrators trample on a portrait of US President Donald Trump during a protest against the attacks by Israel and the US on Iran, as they march towards the US embassy in Baghdad on March 5, 2026.
(Photo by Ahmad Al-Rubaye / AFP via Getty Images)

Steven Harper
Mar 09, 2026

Common Dreams

Minimally competent leaders would have considered at least five obvious questions before launching the nation into war. President Donald Trump considered none of them.
No. 1: What’s the Objective?

It’s not surprising that more than half of all Americans oppose Trump’s War. From the outset, his administration has offered numerous and contradictory justifications for it.




Experts Pillory Trump Case for War on Iran: ‘Flimsiest Excuse for Initiating a Major Attack’ in Decades



Call Grows to Impeach Trump, ‘The Most Dangerous Man on the Planet’

February 28:

Trump cited 47 years of grievances, a desire to destroy Iran’s missiles, and a message that the Iranian people should “seize the moment” because now was their chance to “be brave, be bold, be heroic, and take back your country.”

But he also said that the attack was a campaign to “eliminate the imminent nuclear threat,” although Trump had boasted in June that the United States had already accomplished that goal.

The next day, Pentagon officials told congressional staff members that no intelligence supported the notion that Iran was planning to attack the US first.

The same day, Trump told the Washington Post, “All I want is freedom for the people.”

United Nations Ambassador Mike Walz claimed to the UN Security Council that the US was invoking the right of self-defense in response to Iran’s imminent threat.

But the next day, Pentagon officials told congressional staff members that no intelligence supported the notion that Iran was planning to attack the US first.

March 2:

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told the press that the objective was retaliation for decades of Iranian behavior, destruction of their missiles, and providing an opportunity for Iranians to “take advantage of this incredible opportunity.”

But only hours later, Secretary of State Marco Rubio offered a new justification for the war: Israel was going to attack Iran and, if that happened, Iran would then attack US interests in the region. He made it sound as if Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had maneuvered Trump into a corner.

The next day, Trump contradicted Rubio, saying: “It was my opinion that they [Iran] were going to attack first. They were going to attack if we didn’t do it.” Rebutting any impression that Netanyahu had manipulated him, Trump added, “If anything, I might have forced Israel’s hand.”

Rubio complained that his earlier remarks had been taken out of context and the operation “had to happen anyway.”

March 6:

Trump posted on social media that only “unconditional surrender” would end the war.
No. 2: How Long Will It Last?

March 1: Trump told the New York Times that the operation could take “four to five weeks.” He didn’t mention the Pentagon’s concerns that the war could further deplete reserves that military strategists have said are critical for scenarios such as a conflict over Taiwan or Russian incursions into Europe.

March 2: Trump said that the war could go on longer than four to five weeks.

March 4: Hegseth said that the Iran war is “far from over” and has “only just begun.”

March 6: Trump told the New York Post that he hadn’t ruled out putting “boots on the ground, if necessary.”
No. 3: Who Will Lead Iran After US Strikes Kill Its Supreme Leader?

March 1: Trump told the New York Times that he had “three very good choices” for who could lead Iran.

March 3: Trump admitted: “Most of the people we had in mind are dead… Now we have another group. They may be dead also, based on reports. So I guess you have a third wave coming. Pretty soon we’re not going to know anybody.” Asked about the worst-case scenario for the war, Trump said, “I guess the worst case would be we do this and somebody takes over who’s as bad as the previous person.”

More than a dozen Mideast countries are now embroiled in Trump’s war, including Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen.

March 5: Trump told Axios, “I have to be involved in the appointment [of Iran Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei’s successor], like with Delcy in Venezuela”—referring to Vice President Delcy Rodriguez, who remained in charge of President Nicolás Maduro’s corrupt and repressive regime after the US abducted him. Trump said that Khamenei’s son—rumored to be a leading candidate as successor—is “unacceptable to me” and “a light weight.”

The same day, he told NBC News, “We have some people who I think would do a good job.”

March 7: The Washington Post reported that a classified National Intelligence Committee study issued prior to the war found that even if the US launched a large-scale assault on Iran, it likely would not oust the Islamic republic’s entrenched military and clerical establishment.

March 9: Iran chose Khamenei’s son, a cleric expected to continue his father’s hard-line policies, as the country’s Supreme Leader.
No. 4: How Would a US-Iran War Affect the Mideast?

Before US bombs began to fall, thousands of American citizens were in the war zone. But ahead of the strikes, the State Department didn’t issue official alerts advising Americans that the risk of travel in the region had increased.

Yael Lempert, who helped organize the evacuation of Americans in Libya in 2011 observed, “It is stunning there were no orders for authorized departure for nonessential US government employees and family members in almost all the affected diplomatic missions in the region—nor public recommendations to American citizens to depart—until days into the war.”

After attacks and counterattacks closed airspace and airports throughout the region, on Wednesday, March 4—four days into the war—the State Department finally began evacuations by charter flight. The following day, the New York Times reported:
Until midweek, the State Department had mainly provided stranded travelers with basic information about security conditions and commercial travel options via a telephone hotline and text messages. Before Wednesday, desperate people calling the hotline got an automated message that said the US government could not help get them out of the region.
No. 5: Could the War Lead to Humanitarian, Economic, or Geopolitical Crises?

Only a week into the war, the UN humanitarian chief warned, “This is a moment of grave, grave peril.”

Iran is a country of 90 million people. US-Israel bombing has already displaced more than 100,000 of them.

Israel’s companion attack on Lebanon has displaced more than 300,000 residents.

Asked to rate his Iran war performance on a scale of one to 10, Trump gave himself a “15.”

More than a dozen Mideast countries are now embroiled in Trump’s war, including Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain, Oman, Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen.

The ripple effects span the globe as oil prices spike and Iran disrupts tanker traffic in the Strait of Hormuz—through which one-fifth of the world’s oil flows. During his state of the union message, Trump boasted that the price of gasoline was down to $2,00 per gallon in some states. Last week, the national average price in the US was $3.41 per gallon.

Ominously, on March 6 the Washington Post reported that Russia is providing intelligence assistance to the Iranian military attacking US targets. But Hegseth is “not concerned about that.”

Asked to rate his Iran war performance on a scale of one to 10, Trump gave himself a “15.”

Introspection rarely accompanies incompetence.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.


Steven Harper
Steven J. Harper is an attorney, adjunct professor at Northwestern University Law School, and author of several books, including Crossing Hoffa -- A Teamster's Story and The Lawyer Bubble -- A Profession in Crisis. He has been a regular columnist for Moyers on Democracy, Dan Rather's News and Guts, and The American Lawyer. Follow him at https://thelawyerbubble.com.
Full Bio >

The Cost of War: Iran’s Strategy to Make Trump Pay

Iran’s actions suggest a strategic framework designed to raise the cost of the conflict beyond what its adversaries may be willing to bear. Whether the strategy ultimately succeeds remains uncertain.


A US Army carry team moves a flag-draped transfer case containing the remains of Chief Warrant Officer 3 Robert M. Marzan at Dover Air Force Base March 7, 2026 in Dover, Delaware. Six soldiers from the 103rd Sustainment Command were killed in action by an Iranian drone strike March 1 in Port Shuaiba, Kuwait during Operation Epic Fury.
(Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

Ramzy Baroud
Mar 09, 2026

Common Dreams

Iran is pursuing a multi-layered strategy—military, economic, political, and diplomatic—to raise the cost of war and prevent regime change.

Iran’s Strategy in the Current War

As the war on Iran continues to expand across multiple fronts, Tehran appears to be pursuing a complex strategy that combines military escalation, economic leverage, domestic mobilization, and diplomatic signaling.

Rather than relying on what Iranian officials once described as “strategic patience,” the current approach suggests that Iran is attempting to fundamentally reshape the battlefield by increasing the costs of the war for the United States, Israel, and any regional actors that choose to participate.

The strategy appears to rest on several interconnected pillars designed not only to respond to military attacks but also to prevent the broader objective that Iranian leaders believe lies behind the war: regime change.

Overwhelming the Battlefield

The most visible element of Iran’s strategy has been its attempt to expand the battlefield geographically and operationally.

Rather than focusing solely on Israeli territory, Iran has targeted a wide range of US and allied assets across the region. These include military bases, intelligence facilities, radar systems, and logistical infrastructure that support American operations.

The aim appears to be twofold.

First, Iranian strikes are intended to impose a form of “strategic blindness” on opposing forces by degrading radar systems, surveillance networks, and early-warning capabilities. Such attacks reduce the ability of the United States and Israel to monitor Iranian movements and respond effectively to missile launches or other military operations.

Second, by targeting US bases in multiple countries across the region, Iran is sending a clear message that the conflict will not remain geographically contained.

In practical terms, this means that any country hosting American military facilities risks becoming part of the battlefield.

Iranian officials have repeatedly emphasized that these strikes are directed at US military infrastructure rather than the sovereignty of host nations. Nevertheless, the message is unmistakable: if regional territory is used to launch attacks on Iran, that territory may also become a site of retaliation.

This approach reflects a major shift away from Iran’s previous policy of measured responses and limited escalation.

Instead, Tehran appears to be pursuing a strategy designed to overwhelm the enemy on multiple fronts simultaneously, raising the political and military cost of continuing the war.

Economic Warfare

Alongside its military operations, Iran is also leveraging one of the most powerful tools at its disposal: the geography of global energy supply.

The Strait of Hormuz—through which roughly a fifth of the world’s oil supply passes—has effectively become a war zone. Although Iran has not formally declared a blockade, the conditions created by the conflict have produced a functional shutdown of the waterway.

Missile exchanges, naval deployments, maritime attacks, and the growing threat environment have drastically reduced the willingness of commercial shipping companies to operate in the area. Insurance costs for tankers have surged, while several shipping operators have suspended or rerouted voyages altogether.

In practice, this means that the strait is not closed by decree but by the realities of war.

This distinction is important. Iran does not need to announce a blockade to achieve the strategic effects of one. The instability itself disrupts energy flows, drives oil prices upward, and injects uncertainty into global markets.

The consequences are felt far beyond the Gulf.

European economies—already weakened by energy shocks following the war in Ukraine—are particularly vulnerable to renewed volatility in oil and gas markets. Rising shipping costs, supply disruptions, and market speculation all compound the economic pressure.

For Tehran, this dynamic serves as a powerful form of indirect leverage.

The longer the war continues, the greater the economic consequences for the global system that underpins Western power. In this sense, the Strait of Hormuz functions not merely as a geographic chokepoint but as a strategic pressure valve capable of transmitting the costs of the conflict far beyond the battlefield.

Domestic Cohesion

Another key pillar of Iran’s strategy lies within the country itself.

Western analysts had widely speculated that sustained military pressure—or a leadership decapitation strategy—could produce internal instability or even trigger a political crisis within Iran.

The killing of senior political and military figures, including high-ranking officials, appeared to be designed in part to create such a vacuum.

Yet the anticipated fragmentation has not materialized.

Instead, Iranian authorities have focused on projecting unity and political cohesion. Mass rallies and public demonstrations have taken place across multiple cities, with large crowds gathering in public squares to express support for the government and condemnation of the attacks.

These displays serve an important political function.

By filling public spaces with supporters, the government is attempting to pre-empt the emergence of alternative movements that might claim to represent a popular response to the war.

In effect, the strategy denies external actors the ability to argue that military intervention is intended to support domestic opposition or restore democratic governance.

For Washington and Tel Aviv, the assumption that internal unrest could become a decisive factor appears to have been a significant miscalculation.

Calibrated Diplomacy

Despite the widening military confrontation, Iran has also sought to maintain a careful diplomatic balance with Arab governments.

Iranian officials have repeatedly emphasized that their strikes are directed at US military installations rather than the countries that host them.

This distinction is important.

Tehran’s broader objective appears to be preventing Arab states from becoming full participants in the conflict. While warning that any government enabling US military operations could face retaliation, Iran has simultaneously signaled that it does not seek confrontation with the region as a whole.

The message to Arab governments has therefore been dual-layered: do not allow your territory to be used for attacks on Iran, but if you avoid direct involvement, Iran does not consider you an enemy.

Such messaging reflects Tehran’s understanding that regional alignment could dramatically reshape the war’s dynamics.

Strategic Weaknesses

Despite the coherence of Iran’s overall approach, several weaknesses remain.

One of the most significant challenges lies in the realm of communication.

Iranian media outlets, operating under heavy pressure and frequent targeting, have struggled to project their narrative effectively to global audiences. Compared with the sophisticated international media infrastructure available to Western governments and Israel, Iran’s messaging often fails to reach wider international publics.

This limits Tehran’s ability to frame the conflict on its own terms.

A second challenge concerns the global anti-war movement.

While protests against the war have emerged in various cities around the world, they have not yet reached a scale capable of exerting decisive political pressure on governments supporting the conflict.

For Iran, the expansion of such protests could become a critical factor in constraining the military options available to Washington and its allies.

A War of Strategy

Taken together, Iran’s actions suggest a leadership attempting to wage war according to a clearly defined strategic framework.

Military escalation, economic disruption, domestic mobilization, and diplomatic signaling all appear to function as parts of a single integrated approach designed to raise the cost of the conflict beyond what its adversaries may be willing to bear.

Whether the strategy ultimately succeeds remains uncertain.

What is increasingly evident, however, is that the war is evolving into a contest not only of military capabilities but also of strategic coherence.

For now, Iran appears to be operating according to a calculated plan, while its adversaries continue to search for a sustainable path forward in a rapidly expanding conflict.



Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.


Ramzy Baroud
Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of the Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of five books including: "These Chains Will Be Broken: Palestinian Stories of Struggle and Defiance in Israeli Prisons" (2019), "My Father Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza's Untold Story" (2010) and "The Second Palestinian Intifada: A Chronicle of a People's Struggle" (2006). Dr. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA), Istanbul Zaim University (IZU). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net.
Full Bio >

New Research Details ‘Human and Economic Toll’ of US Abortion Bans

“Abortion bans don’t stay in exam rooms,” said the Center for Reproductive Rights president. “They reshape communities, workplaces, and state economies.”


Abortion rights protestors demonstrate outside the US Supreme Court as oral arguments are delivered in Medina v. Planned Parenthood South Atlantic on April 2, 2025 in Washington DC.
(Photo by Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)

Jessica Corbett
Mar 09, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

With attention directed at President Donald Trump’s war on immigrants across the United States and various international conflicts, including the assault on Iran, there hasn’t been much prominent news coverage in recent weeks about a key issue of the 2024 campaign—GOP abortion bans—but people nationwide continue to endure the impacts of such policies, as revealed in a Monday report from the Center for Reproductive Rights.

The Price of Safety: Stories of Abortions Denied, Careers Disrupted, and States Left Behind features various profiles demonstrating “the human and economic toll” of abortion bans, which right-wing policymakers have enacted or intensified since the US Supreme Court reversed Roe v. Wade with its Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision in 2022.

The anthology uses stories from patients, doctors, business leaders, and others to “show the real-world consequences of laws that criminalize standard medical care,” said Nancy Northup, the center’s president, in a statement. “Abortion bans don’t stay in exam rooms. They reshape communities, workplaces, and state economies. As long as politicians keep restricting care, families will keep moving, clinicians will keep leaving, and states will keep watching their competitive edge slip away.”

“Our daughter’s spine was severely abnormal, her brain hadn’t formed correctly, and she only had one kidney... I did everything by the book medically, but the experience still made me feel like a criminal for seeking evidence-based care for a lethal fetal diagnosis.”

Dani Mathisen, “a Fort Worth native from a family of physicians,” discovered during a routine anatomy scan with her OB-GYN, who is also her aunt, that she needed an abortion, 18 weeks into a planned pregnancy. As she explained, “Our daughter’s spine was severely abnormal, her brain hadn’t formed correctly, and she only had one kidney.”

Texas had banned abortions after six weeks and allowed private citizens to sue anyone who helped a pregnant person access care. According to Mathisen: “My mom, also a doctor, stepped in anyway. She found a clinic in New Mexico, booked the flights and hotel, called the staff, and handed us an envelope of cash. We paid for the abortion with cash out of fear of leaving a paper trail tying Texas credit cards to out-of-state abortion care. I did everything by the book medically, but the experience still made me feel like a criminal for seeking evidence-based care for a lethal fetal diagnosis.”

“I had always imagined building my career in Texas,” she added. “After this, I chose an OB-GYN residency in Hawaii because I needed full-spectrum training—including abortion care—and I couldn’t get that in Texas.”

Mathisen wasn’t alone in fleeing that state. Amanda Ducach, CEO and co-founder of an artificial intelligence startup focused on women’s health, shared how she “built Ema in Houston, and Texas shaped our earliest users and our mission,” but when Roe fell, she “was seven and a half months into a high-risk pregnancy.”

“Suddenly, even if I were to face a life-threatening emergency, I wasn’t sure I’d receive timely care. My doctors weren’t sure either,” Ducach detailed. “It also changed how I thought about my company, and our responsibility to the people who rely on us through our partner platforms.”

“After months of legal review and deep conversations with my team, I decided to relocate both my family and Ema’s headquarters to Massachusetts where abortion access is protected under state law,” she continued. “I also gave employees the option to work from any location, which brought immediate relief.”

“Suddenly, even if I were to face a life-threatening emergency, I wasn’t sure I’d receive timely care. My doctors weren’t sure either.”

Elizabeth Weller also left Texas. She said that “the decision cost us $25,000+ in income, distanced us from our community, and upended the future we had envisioned. But after the pregnancy complications I faced, it was painfully clear: Texas no longer provided the basic medical care necessary to have a child.”

So did Dr. Judy Levison, who spent over two decades practicing and teaching obstetrics and gynecology in the state. After “watching abortion bans turn routine medical care into a legal minefield,” she retired, moved to Colorado, and “began volunteering with an abortion support group.”

It’s not just Texas. Kayla Smith said that she left Idaho—“where I’d lived for 13 years, gone to college, met my husband, built our careers, and wanted to grow our family”—for Washington state. She explained that just 48 hours after Idaho’s ban took effect and “19 weeks into my pregnancy with my second child, we discovered that our baby had a severe, inoperable heart defect.”

Tracy Young, “a first-generation American, a mother of four, and the co-founder of two technology companies,” highlighted how abortion bans also outlaw proper treatment for people experiencing miscarriages. While she is based in San Francisco, California, Young began “losing a pregnancy I had deeply wanted” while traveling for work in Louisiana.

“Back home in California, my doctors told me that my body had not completed the miscarriage naturally. They prescribed misoprostol, and when that wasn’t enough, performed a surgical procedure to prevent infection and complications,” she said. “Today, abortion bans have made that same care illegal or heavily restricted in many states, including Louisiana where I miscarried.”

Another business leader, Chris Webb, CEO and co-founder of ChowNow—an online ordering platform with offices in California and Missouri—publicly supported abortion access in 2019 by signing on to a coalition’s “Don’t Ban Equality” letter. After Roe‘s reversal, he sent out a company-wide email disclosing a girlfriend’s abortion and offering to personally cover the travel costs of any employee who needed such care.

“Leaders owe employees honesty about where they stand—and action when basic rights are on the line,” he said. “Abortion policies aren’t just about healthcare. They’re good for employers and good for people. When more companies speak up, there is safety in numbers. And in the long run, protecting your team protects your business—and is just the right thing to do.”

“Reproductive rights are so crucial that Americans are uprooting their lives to ensure they have access to care.”

The report’s release coincided with the publication of a paper adapted from one prepared for the center by researchers who estimated “the market value of reproductive rights as capitalized into US housing markets.”

The paper, published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, shows that “total abortion bans reduced rents by an average of 2.2% from July 2022 through June 2025, with the effect reaching 4.0% in the most recent year. Over the same horizon, bans increased rental vacancy rates by an average of 1.1 percentage points, with the effect reaching 1.8 percentage points in the most recent year. Estimates for home values and homeowner vacancy rates are similar in magnitude but less precise.”

The center’s senior director, Julia Taylor Kennedy, said that “the economic data and the firsthand accounts are telling the same story... Reproductive rights are so crucial that Americans are uprooting their lives to ensure they have access to care. That means that, for employers and policymakers, abortion bans carry measurable workforce and competitiveness implications.”

Despite such findings, Republican state and federal policymakers continue to restrict reproductive freedom. In recent months, the Trump administration quietly imposed an abortion ban at the US Department of Veterans Affairs and expanded the global gag rule.

Meanwhile, at the state level last month, Tennessee Republicans introduced legislation to make abortion a capital offense, and a sheriff’s office in South Carolina launched an investigation into a fetus, estimated to be just 13-15 weeks, found at a water treatment plant, highlighting the rising criminalization of pregnancy loss.

Last week, the Marion County Superior Court granted a permanent injunction preventing enforcement of Indiana’s near-total abortion ban, and Republican Attorney General Todd Rokita swiftly appealed.

Video Suggests Trump’s ICE Lied About Its First Known Killing of a US Citizen Last March

“He was shot at point-blank range through his side window by an ICE agent who was in no danger,” said lawyers for the family of Ruben Ray Martinez.


Body camera footage shows federal immigration agents and police officers surrounding Ruben Ray Martinez after he was shot on March 15, 2025 in South Padre Island, Texas.
(Image via South Padre Island Police Department)

Julia Conley
Mar 09, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Materials released over the weekend by the Texas Department of Public Safety regarding a homeland security officer’s killing of 23-year-old Ruben Ray Martinez last March in Texas appeared to provide the latest evidence that federal agents have misled the public about the circumstances surrounding fatal shootings.

American Oversight, a government watchdog group, revealed last month that nearly a year before the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis, Martinez was the first known US citizen to be killed by an agent of the Trump administration who was carrying out official duties.


‘How Many Other Killings Are They Concealing?’ ICE Shot Ruben Ray Martinez in Texas Last March

Since then, a grand jury has declined to indict the accused officer, Homeland Security Investigations agent Jack C. Stevens, and American Oversight as well as Martinez’s family and lawyers have demanded that state authorities release the findings of their investigation into the killing, with the watchdog filing a Freedom of Information Act request.

The body camera footage released on Saturday called into question statements that were made by the Department of Homeland Security after Martinez’s killing was publicly revealed, when a DHS spokesperson said the young man “intentionally ran over” an agent.

Internal documents also claimed officers commanded Martinez to get out of his car after he approached the scene of a vehicle accident and that he “accelerated forward, striking a HSI special agent who wound up on the hood of the vehicle.”

The video that was released came from a body camera worn by a South Padre Island, Texas police officer who was one of a number of local, state, and federal agents securing an area after a car accident.



About 21 minutes into the officer’s footage, someone can be heard saying, “Keep going” as Martinez’s car approaches the scene. The car briefly stops for some pedestrians, and officers soon appear to become concerned, running toward the vehicle and shouting, “Stop him” and, “Get him out.”

Martinez’s car appears to be moving slowly, with the brake lights on, as three gunshots are heard and just after.

The video then shows an officer removing Martinez from the car and throwing him on the ground while his friend who was in the car with him, Joshua Orta, is taken into custody.

The internal DHS documents said a second HSI agent Hector Sosa, was struck by the car in his legs, falling over the hood. The footage is taken from behind the car, making it unclear whether Sosa was hit—but it does not show Martinez accelerating.

If an officer was hit, University of South Carolina criminal justice professor Geoffrey P. Albert told the Washington Post, based on the footage of the car it would have been a case of “officer-created jeopardy.”

“The contradictory orders are confusing and may have been a strong influence,” Alpert told the Post. “The speed is slow and doesn’t appear threatening. Could the officer have moved away? At worst, all he has to do is step aside.”

He added that the body camera video raises “a lot of red flags.”

Lawyers for Martinez’s family, Charles M. Stam and Alex Stamm, said in a statement that the videos confirm the 23-year-old’s car “was barely moving when he was shot.”

“He was shot at point-blank range through his side window by an ICE agent who was in no danger,” said the attorneys.

Orta, who was killed last month in an unrelated vehicle accident in San Antonio, provided a witness statement after Martinez was killed, saying “I state clearly and without hesitation that Ruben did not hit anyone,” Orta wrote. “The trooper seemed to be trying to get in front of the car, like he wasn’t moving out of the way when we tried to turn around and leave like the police officer told us to do.”

More than a dozen people have been killed by federal immigration officers since President Donald Trump took office for his second term in January 2025.

In the case of Good, an independent autopsy was conducted as part of a civil investigation into her killing and found “strong evidence” against the agent who shot her, calling into question the Trump administration’s claim that the officer had killed the 37-year-old in self-defense.

A preliminary government investigation into Pretti’s killing did not find that the legal observer had threatened or attacked the Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection agents who fatally shot him, as the administration had first claimed.

Both Pretti and Good were immediately denounced as “domestic terrorists” by administration officials.

DHS also claimed that Marimar Martinez, a Chicago resident who was shot several times by a federal agent but survived last October, had “rammed” officers’ vehicles. Body camera footage and text messages from officers later undermined those claims. Federal prosecutors abruptly dropped their criminal case against Martinez weeks after she was shot.

The video of Martinez’s killing in Texas, said columnist Nicholas Kristof, suggests that the DHS account of that incident “may be a lie” as well.

Fake AI satellite imagery spurs US-Iran war disinformation


By AFP
March 8, 2026


The rise of generative AI has turbocharged the ability to fabricate convincing satellite imagery that can be exploited during conflicts - Copyright AFP ATTA KENARE
Anuj CHOPRA

The satellite image posted by an Iranian news outlet looked real: a devastated US base in Qatar. But it was an AI-generated fake, underscoring the accelerating threat of tech-enabled disinformation during wartime.

The rise of generative AI has turbocharged the ability of state actors and propagandists to fabricate convincing satellite imagery during major conflicts, a trend that researchers warn carries real-world security implications.

As the US-Israeli war against Iran rages, Tehran Times, a state-aligned English daily, posted on X a “before vs. after” image it claimed showed “completely destroyed” US radar equipment at a base in Qatar.

In fact it was an AI-manipulated version of a Google Earth image from last year of a US base in Bahrain, researchers said.

The subtle visual giveaways included a row of cars parked in identical positions in both the authentic satellite photo and the manipulated image.

Yet the manipulated photo garnered millions of views as it spread across social media in multiple languages, illustrating how users are increasingly failing to distinguish reality from fiction on platforms saturated with AI-generated visuals.

Brady Africk, an open-source intelligence researcher, noted an “increase in manipulated satellite imagery” appearing on social media in the wake of major events including the Middle East war.

“Many of these manipulated images have the hallmarks of imperfect AI-generation: odd angles, blurred details, and hallucinated features that don’t align with reality,” Africk told AFP.

“Others appear to be an image manipulated manually, often by superimposing indicators of damage or another change on a satellite image that had no such details to begin with,” he said.

– ‘Fog of war’ –

Information warfare analyst Tal Hagin flagged another AI-generated satellite image purporting to show that Israeli-US jets had targeted the painted silhouette of an aircraft on the ground in Iran, while Tehran seemingly moved real planes elsewhere.

The telltale clues included gibberish coordinates embedded in the fake image, which spread across sites including Instagram, Threads and X.

AFP detected a SynthID, an invisible watermark meant to identify images created using Google AI.

The fabricated satellite images follow the emergence of imposter OSINT — or open-source intelligence — accounts on social media that appear to undermine the work of credible digital investigators.

“Due to the fog of war, it can be very difficult to determine the success of an adversary’s strikes. OSINT came as a solution, using public satellite imagery to circumvent the censorship” inside countries like Iran, Hagin said.

“But it’s now being preyed upon by disinformation agents,” he added.

Reports of fake satellite imagery created or edited using AI also followed the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the four-day war between India and Pakistan last year.

– ‘Critical awareness’ –

“Manipulated satellite imagery, like other forms of misinformation, can have real-world impacts when people act on the information they come across without verifying its authenticity,” Africk said.

“This can have effects that range from influencing public opinion on a major issue, like whether or not a country should engage in conflict, to impacting financial markets.”

In the age of AI, authentic high-resolution satellite imagery collected in real time can give decision-makers vital clues to assess security threats and debunk falsehoods from unverified sources.

During a recent militant attack on Niamey airport in Niger, satellite intelligence company Vantor said it detected images circulating online purporting to show the main civilian terminal on fire.

The company’s own satellite imagery helped confirm that the photos were fake, almost certainly generated using AI, Vantor’s Tomi Maxted told AFP.

“When a satellite image is presented as visual evidence in the context of war, it can easily influence how people interpret events,” Bo Zhao, from the University of Washington, told AFP.

As AI-generated imagery grows increasingly convincing, it is “important for the public to approach such visual content with caution and critical awareness,” Zhao said.

ZIONIST IMPERIALISM

Israel strikes hotel in central Beirut as Lebanon says war toll nears 400


Israel's military said it hit Iranian commanders in the Lebanese capital early on Sunday, expanding the scope of its campaign to the heart of Beirut after days of strikes that have left nearly 400 people dead in Lebanon alone and displaced more than half a million.


Issued on: 08/03/2026 - 
By: FRANCE 24
Video by: Catherine NORRIS TRENT

The Ramada Plaza hotel building in central Beirut pictured in the aftermath of an Israeli strike, on March 8, 2026. © Claudia Greco, Reuters
03:54



Israel struck a hotel in central Beirut on Sunday, the first attack on the city centre since the start of the new war with Hezbollah, as Lebanon said nearly 400 people were killed over the past week.

Lebanon was drawn into the Middle East war on Monday, when Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah attacked Israel in response to the killing of Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei during US-Israeli strikes.

Israel, which has kept up strikes targeting Hezbollah despite a 2024 ceasefire, launched multiple waves of strikes this week across Lebanon and sent ground troops into border areas.

Hezbollah said on Sunday that it repeatedly targeted northern Israel, including attacking a naval base in Haifa and sending a swarm of drones towards the city of Nahariya.

Israel's military, meanwhile, said that two of its soldiers were killed in combat in southern Lebanon, the first fatalities among its forces since the latest offensive began on March 2.

It also reiterated its call for Lebanese residents to leave the area south of the Litani River, which covers many hundreds of square kilometres (miles).

Lebanon's health minister Rakan Nassereddine on Sunday said Israeli strikes on Lebanon killed 394 people over the past week, including 83 children and 42 women.

© France 24
02:02

Social affairs minister Haneen Sayed later said 517,000 displaced people had registered their names on a website affiliated with the ministry, including 117,228 people in government shelters.

Earlier the same day, the health ministry said an Israeli air strike hit Beirut's city centre, targeting "a hotel room" and killing four people and wounding 10 others.
'No safe place'

"I came here from the southern suburbs to be safe with my children and the strike hit," said Abu Hussein, a 45-year-old taxi driver while showing his damaged car.

"There is no safe place."

An AFP photographer at the bombarded seafront hotel saw one room on the fourth floor with shattered glass and charred walls, while security forces cordoned off the site.

Israel's military said it had "conducted a precise strike" targeting "five commanders" in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards' Quds Force, its foreign operations arm, "while they were meeting at a hotel in Beirut".

Lebanese first responders inspect a Beirut hotel room targeted by the Israeli strike © Ibrahim AMRO / AFP


A security official at the scene told AFP on condition of anonymity that Hezbollah-linked rescuers recovered three bodies from the hotel.

The Raouche area is a major tourist destination and remained untouched by Israeli strikes during the previous war between Israel and Hezbollah, which a November 2024 ceasefire sought to end.

Along its Mediterranean coast, the area is home to dozens of hotels, now overcrowded with displaced people who fled their homes elsewhere in Lebanon.
Iranians evacuated

Lebanon's government on Thursday banned any activity by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps -- a main backer of the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.

A Lebanese official who requested anonymity told AFP that "a total of 117 Iranians, including diplomats and embassy staff, were evacuated on a Russian plane that left Beirut overnight from Saturday to Sunday" for Turkey.

Lebanese Foreign Minister Youssef Raggi also accused Hezbollah of carrying out a "blatant attack on Cyprus", after Nicosia said an Iranian-made drone that hit a British base on the island on Monday was probably fired by Hezbollah in Lebanon.

In the south, a strike on Sir al-Gharbiyeh, just north of the Litani, killed 11 people including children according to the health ministry, with rescue efforts ongoing to find people under the rubble.

Standing next to a destroyed home, resident Ali Youssef Taha told AFP that "a family was sleeping inside" before "Israeli warplanes bombed the building, resulting in a massacre".

© France 24
02:04

Later on Sunday, Lebanon's state-run National News Agency reported two Israeli strikes on the Palestinian refugee camp of Ain al-Hilweh in the south.

Earlier that day, an Israeli strike on Tefahta, also in the south but above the Litani river, killed six people according to the Lebanese health ministry.

Israel's army said, meanwhile, that it struck "over 600" Hezbollah targets and killed 200 members of the group in the past week.

It announced in a later statement that it carried out over 100 air strikes in Lebanon targeting Hezbollah.

Lebanon's health minister insisted that "these are civilians being targeted, not, as they claim, military personnel and military installations", adding that nine rescuers had been killed since the start of the latest war.

On Friday night, a failed Israeli commando operation to find the remains of airman Ron Arad, missing since 1986, killed 41 people in eastern Lebanon.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)

'Trump lying': Top military officials tear apart president's take on Iran school massacre

“Based on what I’ve seen, it was done by Iran,” Trump said.

Travis Gettys
March 9, 2026 

RAW STORY

The U.S. military disputed President Donald Trump's claims about an airstrike that killed at least 175 people at an Iranian elementary school.

Three current and former defense officials, and even Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, pushed back on the president's claim that Iran had launched the attack on the Shajarah Tayyebeh school in Minab that left scores of children dead, reported The Intercept.

“This is another instance of Trump lying and just talking out of his a--,” said a U.S. government official who reviewed satellite images of the school. “This clearly was not a failed rocket from the IRGC base.”

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps operated a navy base adjacent to the school, and social media accounts that support the restoration of Iran's monarchy pushed false claims about the attack that Trump then repeated.

“Based on what I’ve seen, it was done by Iran,” Trump said.

Hegseth stopped short of agreeing with the president, saying "we're certainly investigating." But U.S. Central Command, which oversees the Middle East, said that commenting before an investigation was complete was improper.

“It would be inappropriate to comment given the incident is under investigation," said a CENTCOM spokesperson.

An expert examined video of the attack showing a cruise missile striking the naval base near the elementary school, which was already on fire, and he said the U.S. was clearly at fault and likely misidentified the target.

“This munition is only employed by the U.S., not Israel or Iran,” said Wes Bryant, a former Special Operations joint terminal attack controller who called in thousands of strikes across the Middle East. “The strikes on this compound have the signature of a U.S. strike. The strikes on this compound are also incredibly precise and well-placed. This entire compound — including the girls’ school — was deliberately targeted in a highly precise strike operation.”

Another former Pentagon official agreed with Bryant and the current U.S. official.

“The entry holes suggest a near perpendicular entry. Meaning, this strike was precisely targeting the structures from high above, not some short range attack with a ballistic missile,” said the former Pentagon official, who specialized in civilian harm issues. “All evidence points to the compound being repeatedly attacked — over the course of a couple hours potentially — with highly accurate munitions that we know the U.S. and Israel routinely use and have used in strikes across Iran.”

‘10 Classrooms Full of Children’: US-Israeli War Kills Hundreds of Iranian, Lebanese Kids

“Classrooms of children in Iran. Hundreds of people in Lebanon. The ongoing genocide in Gaza,” said Jeremy Corbyn. “The message from our political and media class is clear: Their lives are less valuable than others.”

Iranian women hold photos of children who are killed by US-Israeli attacks, including a massacre at a Minab girls’ school that killed around 175 people, during a demonstration in Tehran on March 7, 2026.
(Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Brett Wilkins
Mar 09, 2026

COMMON DREAMS

US and Israeli airstrikes have killed nearly 300 Iranian and Lebanese children over the past nine days as the attackers target apartment towers, single-family homes, schools, medical facilities, and other civilian infrastructure.

Iran’s Health Ministry said Sunday that 198 women and 190 minors have been killed by US and Israeli attacks since February 28, including six children under the age of 5. The youngest reported victim is an 8-month-old girl. Children account for more than 30% of those killed, according to the ministry, which also said that 1,044 women and 638 children have been injured.

Overall, Iran said that more than 1,300 people have been killed by the airstrikes, which are reportedly targeting 30 of the country’s 31 provinces.

The Lebanese Health Ministry announced Sunday that 394 people, including 42 women and 83 children, have been killed by Israel Defense Forces (IDF) attacks after Iran-backed Hezbollah joined the war.

The US-based charity Save the Children noted Monday that the number of slain Iranian and Lebanese minors is the equivalent of “10 classrooms full of children.”

“It is devastating that airstrikes in Lebanon have reportedly caused the deaths of 83 children... among nearly 300 children killed in the region,” said Save the Children Lebanon director Nora Ingdal. “These are not just numbers—these are young lives cut short and children whose futures have been forever scarred by war.”

Israel claims it has killed around 200 Hezbollah fighters. However, the IDF’s routine attacks on apartment towers and other residential buildings have drawn widespread condemnation.

On Sunday, an IDF strike massacred 18 people sheltering in an apartment building in Sir El-Gharbiyeh in Nabatieh district. The building was housing some of the nearly 700,000 Lebanese forcibly displaced by Israeli attacks, including around 200,000 children. Local officials said women and children were among the victims.

Another IDF aerial massacre in the southern Lebanese town of Tafahata killed eight people, including five members of the Ezzedine family, whose home was bombed.

“This time is much worse than the previous war,” Nabatieh Civil Defense chief Hussein Faqih told the National, referring to Israel’s 2023-25 attacks on Lebanon that killed more than 4,000 people, including nearly 800 women and over 300 children, in retaliation for Hezbollah’s rocket strikes in solidarity with Palestine during the Gaza genocide.

Israeli attacks on Iran during last year’s 12-Day War also killed more than 1,000 Iranians, including 436 civilians.

In the worst reported bombing of the current war—and possibly the deadliest US massacre since over 400 Iraqis were wiped out in a “precision strike” on a Baghdad bomb shelter during the 1991 Gulf War—around 175 Iranians, most of them young children, were killed in what first responders and victims’ relatives said was a so-called double-tap strike on an elementary school in Minab in southern Iran.

US military investigators reportedly believe the strike was carried out by US forces, but President Donald Trump has blamed Iran.

On Monday, a group of Democratic US senators lead by Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire said they were “horrified” by the school strike.

“The killing of school children is appalling and unacceptable under any circumstance,” the senators said in a statement. “This incident is particularly concerning in light of [Defense Secretary Pete] Hegseth’s openly cavalier approach to the use of force, including his statement that US strikes in Iran wouldn’t be bound by ‘stupid rules of engagement,’ in his words.”

Multiple members of the UK Parliament have condemned the killing of Iranian and Lebanese children. Leftist Independent Jeremy Corbyn, a former Labour leader, said Monday on Bluesky: “Classrooms of children in Iran. Hundreds of people in Lebanon. The ongoing genocide in Gaza. The message from our political and media class is clear: Their lives are less valuable than others.”

“Every human being matters, and every human being deserves a life of peace,” Corbyn added.

Zahra Sultana, who quit Labour and started the socialist Your Party with Corbyn last year, mocked US and Israeli pretensions, saying in a BBC interview on Sunday—International Women’s Day—that the girls in the Minab school were slaughtered “apparently to liberate women.”



Retaliatory attacks by Iran have killed at least 11 Israelis and wounded nearly 2,000 others since February 28, according to Israel’s government. No Israeli child deaths have been reported. Seven US troops and at least 15 people in Gulf Arab nations have also been killed by Iranian counterattacks.

While the world’s focus is on Iran, Israeli occupation forces have continued killing and wounding people in Gaza and the West Bank of Palestine. Drop Site News reported Monday that eight Palestinians were killed in Gaza over the past 24 hours, including two women and at least as many children.



More than 250,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces since the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023. More than 20,000 children have been killed and over 44,000 others wounded. More than 1 in 4 fatalities have been children in a war for which Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes, and Israel is facing a genocide case currently before the International Court of Justice.

Since the 9/11 attacks, US-led wars have left nearly 1 million people dead in more than half a dozen countries in the Middle East, South Asia, and Africa—over 400,000 of them civilians, according to the Costs of War Project at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs.

“Every war is a war on children, and once again we are seeing them pay the highest price for a conflict they neither started nor had a say in,” Ingdal said Monday.

“Wars have laws, and children must be off limits in every conflict,” she added. “World leaders must act urgently to prevent further escalation. There must be an immediate cessation of hostilities, and all parties must uphold international humanitarian law and do everything in their power to protect civilians—especially children.”