New Tweets

Wars 2026 02/28 Israel-Iran War 3.0

G War Archive
Wars 2026 02/28 Israel-Iran War 3.0
22
147
More threads by RayKalm


War of attrition or for regime change?

SYED FATTAHUL ALIM
Published :
Mar 02, 2026 00:03
Updated :
Mar 02, 2026 00:03

1772412314030.webp


The much-anticipated attack on Iran by the US finally took place last Saturday morning when people on the streets of Tehran, the country's capital, were on their way to work. But it was not only in Tehran, the attacks were carried out across the nation. As the air strike hit an elementary girls' school in Minab, a city in the Hormozgan province of southern Iran, a large number of children were killed (some 148 in one estimate) setting a usual pattern of targeting children in the recent wars in Gaza and other places in Palestine. Apart from the elementary school casualties, according to Iran's Red Cross society, till Sunday morning more than 200 people died in US-Israeli attacks on Iran. Also, according to Iran's foreign ministry, a range of military and defence installations as well as civilian infrastructures in different cities was also included in the US-Israeli air campaign. Obviously, the target was to decapitate Iran's entire leadership structure including the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khameini, (who Iran later confirmed was killed along with his daughter, son-in-law, grandson, in the attack) and other top Iranian military leaders and thus effect a regime change. US president Donald Trump had explicitly stated this in a post on the social media saying: "Our objective is to defend American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime'. President Trump's declaration of war has a familiar ring to it as we heard similar utterances from the former US president George W. Bush, who in March 2003 initiated military operations against Iraq arguing that it (Iraq) possessed weapons of mass destruction (WWMD). But at the end of the war that destroyed Iraq, no trace of WWMD could be found in that country.

Anyway, under whatever pretext that was handy, an ancient land considered the 'cradle of civilization' was bombed to smithereens. To all appearances, it is now the turn of Iran, another seat of what was known as Persian civilization whose root dates back to 4000-3200 BCE. It sounds like the Mongol invasion of Baghdad in the beginning (January-February) of the year 1258 that put an end to the Islamic Golden Age. It can also be compared to the sacking of Rome by the barbarian Visigoths in August, 410. Evidently, the air campaign by US-Israel was massive as it hit 20 of Iran's 31 provinces. Actually, Israel started the attack and in coordination with Israel, the US followed suit. As it was the case with June 2025's twelve-day war, the combined US-Israel bombing campaign against Iran came amid negotiations between the US and Iran over limiting the latter's so-called nuclear ambition. But Iran has been consistently denying the allegation that it was developing a nuclear weapon. Clearly, as before, the talks on the so-called nuclear issue were a ruse to catch Iran off guard with the air attacks and other activities of sabotage within the country. But this time Iran could respond rather within hours in kind through launching a missile barrage on Israel and the US military bases in the Gulf region. Evidently, the joint US-Israel attacks on Iran led to a large number of civilian casualties. The objective of the attack codenamed,'Operation Epic Fury', by the US as announced by President Trump is what he said was to defend the American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime. What are the threats from Iran? As president Trump claimed, Iran was pursuing a nuclear weapons programme. But they (Iran) can never have a nuclear weapon, Trump declared. Interestingly following the June, 2025's US attack on Iran using B-2 bombers, Trump claimed that Iran's nuclear capabilities were 'obliterated'. So, one wonders how could Iran within a few months of 'obliteration' of its nuclear programme develop or was on the verge of developing a nuclear weapon? It reminds one of the famous story of the Aesop fable, 'The Wolf and the Lamb' where the wolf was looking for an excuse to eat the lamb by making an accusation that the lamb muddied the spring water he (the wolf) was drinking, though the lamb was drinking from a spot in the downstream of the spring.

Now whatever the excuses of the renewed military campaign against Iran by US president Trump and the Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu, how close are they to achieve their much-trumpeted target of 'regime change' in Iran? That is more so when Iran's supreme leader along with some of his descendants have been killed, a report that Irani state media itself confirmed? It appears, even with decapitation of Iran's supreme leader, the regime is still intact. Otherwise, how could the country's armed forces launch a series of vicious missile attacks against Israel and US military bases in the region? Even so, Israel claimed what it termed 'very high success' in eliminating Iran's leadership saying that along with the Ayatollah, it also killed Iran's president Masoud Pezeshkian, General Mohammad Pakpour, a commander in Iran's Islami Military Guard Corps, Ali Shamkhani, adviser to the supreme leader and Amir Nasirzadeh, Iran's defence minister. However, except the death of Ayatollah, Iran has not confirmed thus far all the deaths as claimed by Israel. Despite the initial setback caused by the supreme leader's death, which Irani people did not celebrate, but protested and defying the attacks took to the streets in thousands. It shows that the majority of the population is still behind the regime. But the question is how long can Iran stand the sustained air campaign and missile attacks from the US strike force in the sea as well as from land bases. Now the US president's target is to end the war quickly through a regime change in Iran. But what if Iran refuses to capitulate and a war of attrition starts? In that case, the US would be caught in a long-drawn war as it happened in the case of recent Afghan war or the Vietnam war of the 1960s? Notably, there was little domestic support for the Iran war except for few war-hawks in the administration and among the Atlanticist circles. But it would be too early to predict what turn Iran war might finally take.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Respond

8 Killed in Iranian missile strike on Israel

AFP
Jerusalem
Published: 01 Mar 2026, 20: 02

1772412994377.webp

An Israeli emergency service officer walks past the debris of building at the scene of a missile attack near Bet Shemesh, some 30 kilometres west of Jerusalem on 1 March 2026. A barrage of missiles launched from Iran killed at least six people in the central Israel city of Bet Shemesh on 1 March Israel's first responders agency, Magen David Adom (MDA) said, the day after the US and Israel attacked Iran and assassinated its supreme leader.AFP

The death toll from an Iranian missile attack Sunday in the Israeli city of Beit Shemesh rose to at least eight people, first responders said, making it the deadliest single strike in the country since the war began.

The Magen David Adom emergency service said: "In the Beit Shemesh area, MDA EMTs and paramedics have pronounced the deaths of eight", as well as 28 people injured, with police saying it was a direct hit on a building.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Respond
There was absolutely no need for this senseless unprovoked military action. Iranians had already agreed to most of the US terms.

And now the developed world (and even poor countries) will suffer raised prices for energy (Gasoline and LNG), and as a result all manner of consumables including food.

As if prices were not high enough already.

Just senseless and stupid.
 
Last edited:
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Respond
  • Like (+1)
Reactions: Saif and Afhan

Middle East ministers call Khalilur to mourn deaths, assure safety of Bangladeshi expats

bdnews24.com
Published :
Mar 02, 2026 23:43
Updated :
Mar 02, 2026 23:43

1772497271993.webp


Foreign ministers from four Middle Eastern nations have reached out to Foreign Minister Khalilur Rahman to express condolences over the deaths of two Bangladeshi expatriates and assure the safety of the expat community amid the escalating regional conflict.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed in a media release on Monday that the top diplomats from Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Qatar held separate telephonic conversations with Khalilur.

The calls were made by Kuwaiti Foreign Minister Sheikh Jarrah Jaber Al-Ahmad Al-Sabah, Bahrain’s Abdullatif bin Rashid Alzayani, UAE Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan, and Qatar’s Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Sultan bin Saad bin Sultan Al Muraikhi .

During the discussions, the Gulf leaders noted that they consider Bangladeshi nationals their own residents, the media statement said.

Highlighting the deep-rooted brotherly ties, the ministers praised the expatriates as "hardworking, law-abiding, and responsible", acknowledging their significant contributions to the host nations' economies, according to the statement.

The ministers from Kuwait, Bahrain, and the UAE expressed deep grief and concern over the recent deaths of two Bangladeshi nationals and the injuries sustained by seven others amidst the ongoing conflict.

"The ministers described the recent unprovoked attacks in their countries as 'unacceptable' and reaffirmed their commitment to ensuring the protection of all civilians," the media statement said.

The Gulf representatives also conveyed their gratitude to the Bangladesh government for its solidarity during these difficult times.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Respond

An uncalled-for war with serious repercussions

FE
Published :
Mar 03, 2026 00:07
Updated :
Mar 03, 2026 00:07

1772497641832.webp


It is sheer madness to capture the president of a sovereign country and kill the Shia cleric and supreme leader of another. While a military operation was carried out by the United States of America (USA) to abduct Nicolas Maduro from Venezuela, a precision attack jointly conducted by the US and Israel based on information from the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) killed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei of Iran. Such abduction and killing of the president of a country and the supreme leader of another country respectively are a blatant violation of the United Nations (UN) charter. But the man who has orchestrated such attacks could not care less if his actions subject him liable to a trial at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Indeed, Donald Trump, the incumbent US president, could not hold the UN and its charter along with other international institutions and treaties more in contempt. Only his words are laws.

Where will Trump's incursion stop? In June last year he and his ally Israel attacked the nuclear facilities in Iran. At the time he boasted that Iran's capacity for developing nuclear warheads was eliminated. If that is so, why are there the fresh attacks to obliterate Israel's 'existential' threat? This time the bombing campaign was launched just at the time negotiations for de-escalation of the explosive situation was going on in Geneva with Oman acting as an intermediary. Unless the man in the White House is stopped, he may end up doing incalculable harm to human civilisation. He has already done enough harm to the international order of both politics and economy. Although he has backtracked from overtaking Greenland, he has threatened to take over Cuba. At least 11 countries from Colombia to Canada, from Nicaragua to Nigeria, from Mexico to Syria and from Nigeria to Panama have come under his threat. For months he teased with Canada that he won't mind annexing it as its 51st state.

He sounds more like a bully than the president of the most powerful nation on the planet. Less than a quarter of the Americans now endorse his plan and policies. But he has been elected president by their votes. Without impeachment he cannot be removed. Richard Nixon was impeached for Watergate cover-up. The charges were obstruction of justice, abuse of power and contempt of the Congress. Trump appears to have committed the second and third offences. But the uncalled for military campaigns against other sovereign nations, which have killed even innocent school children, should be considered the gravest of all crimes.

Now the repercussions of the Iran war is proving highly costly even for Bangladesh. Already one Bangladeshi worker is killed and four others injured in the Iranian retaliatory attacks. Flights have been cancelled in the Middle East and the safety of migrant workers has become a serious concern. Closure of the Hormuz Straits, an important route for international trade and oil supply may prove a serious blow to economies of countries on distant shores. Already in crisis of energy, Bangladesh may be one of the worst hit. So the twin dangers to life of migrant workers in the ME and fuel supply may take a heavy toll on this country's economy.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Respond

Trump warns of longer Iran war, Rubio points at Israel
Agence France-Presse. Washington, United States 03 March, 2026, 06:28

1772500467585.webp

President Donald Trump | AFP File Photo

President Donald Trump warned Monday of a longer Iran war and refused to rule out ground troops, as his top diplomat suggested the timing of the US military operation was triggered by Israel.

Trump's brief remarks at the White House were his first in public since launching the strikes, after two Truth Social videos and a string of sometimes contradictory phone calls to media outlets.

But Secretary of State Marco Rubio's comments about Israel later added to the mixed messaging about the war, launched by a president who long campaigned against US entanglements in the Middle East.

Speaking at the start of a medal presentation event at the White House, Trump insisted that he needed to strike, saying it was the ‘last, best chance’ to hit Washington's decades-long arch-foe.

The 79-year-old Republican also warned that an extended war was possible, even as he said operations were currently running ahead of schedule.

‘From the beginning we projected four to five weeks, but we have capability to go far longer than that,’ Trump said.

The US president also for the first time clearly laid out four explicit goals for Operation Epic Fury.

‘First, we're destroying Iran's missile capabilities...Second, we're annihilating their navy...Third, we're ensuring that the world's number-one sponsor of terror can never obtain a nuclear weapon,’ he said.

‘Finally we are ensuring the Iranian regime can't continue to arm, fund and direct terrorist armies outside of their borders.’

Very wise

But Rubio later said Trump's ‘very wise’ decision came after learning Israel was going to strike and fearing Tehran would retaliate against US forces -- despite Trump making no such claim earlier.

‘We knew that there was going to be an Israeli action. We knew that that would precipitate an attack against American forces, and we knew that if we didn't preemptively go after them before they launched those attacks, we would suffer higher casualties,’ Rubio told reporters.

Asked if the United States faced an imminent threat from Iran -- a key threshold in the United States as Congress constitutionally has the power to declare war -- Rubio again pointed to the Israeli plans.

Trump's avoidance of any major national address or press conference to make the case for the war, the biggest US conflict in the Middle East for two decades, is a major break from other presidents.

Instead he has had brief phone calls with a series of media outlets.

He refused to rule out sending US troops into Iran in an interview with the New York Post on Monday.

Such a move could risk far higher casualties than the six service members killed so far.

‘I don't have the yips with respect to boots on the ground,’ Trump said, using a golf term for anxiety. ‘Every president says, 'There will be no boots on the ground.' I don't say it.’

Trump also spoke to CNN on Monday, flagging what he said would be an escalation in the assault on Iran. ‘The big wave hasn't even happened,’ he said. ‘The big one is coming soon.’

This is not endless

The rest of Trump's administration was also silent until a press conference by Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth and top US military officer Dan Caine on Monday morning, in which Hegseth also signaled that deploying troops inside Iran had not been ruled out.

Asked if there were already boots on the ground, Hegseth told the news conference: ‘No, but we're not going to go into the exercise of what we will or will not do.’

Hegseth insisted the conflict would not drag on like past long-running US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

.This is not Iraq. This is not endless,’ said Hegseth, an Iraq veteran.

Trump's virtual silence on the justifications and goals in Iran had sparked criticism from members of his Make America Great Again movement, who bought into his pledges of an end to foreign wars.

But the White House has been trying to straighten out its messaging over the past 24 hours.

Replying to one MAGA critic on social media, Trump's Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said Monday that Trump had laid out ‘clear objectives.’​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Respond

Govt statements on Gulf conflict spark mixed reactions
Staff Correspondent 02 March, 2026, 23:55

1772500742215.webp


The Bangladesh Students’ Union holds a protest rally condemning the United States’ and Israel’s attacks on Iran and Palestine at the base of the Anti-Violence Raju Memorial Sculpture on the Dhaka University campus on Monday. | New Age photo

Politicians, academics and foreign affairs experts have expressed mixed reactions about Bangladesh’s stance on joint attacks launched by the United States and Israel on Iran and retaliatory strikes from Tehran across the Gulf states.

They said that the new government-led by Bangladesh Nationalist Party chairman Tarique Rahman should have condemned any acts of aggression on a sovereign state, making its foreign policy clear at the very outset without being submissive to any country.

Former Dhaka University professor Mahbub Ullah said that Bangladesh should have condemned the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran.

‘Condemning any act of aggression is desirable,’ economist Mahbub Ullah said on Monday.

Former Jahangirnagar University economics professor Anu Muhammad said that it was a matter of concern that Bangladesh could not condemn the aggression despite the fact that the US launched the attack on Iran after an open announcement to kill the Iranian leader in a clear violation of all international laws and norms.

‘It’s a dangerous sign for Bangladesh to stay subservient or submissive to the United States in this situation,’ he observed.

Hours after Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was killed in a massive US and Israeli attack launched on Saturday, Bangladesh on Sunday condemned the violation of sovereignty in several Gulf Arab states, including Bahrain, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, which hosts US bases targeted by Iran in retaliatory attacks across the region.

It also expressed concerns over the safety and security of Bangladesh nationals residing in Iran in the wake of the attacks on the country, according to Sunday’s press release issued by the foreign ministry in Dhaka.

Amid criticisms, the government in a fresh statement on Monday said that the assassination of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was a violation of international law and norms.

Anu, also an activist, said that Bangladesh apparently acted as a rubber stamp of the United States, inviting potential dangers for itself by making such statements on the escalating Gulf conflict following the US-Israel attacks on Iran.

M Humayun Kabir, former foreign secretary and president of the Bangladesh Enterprise Institute, however, said that there was a lack of professionalism in drafting the statement.

‘It seems that enough attention was not given to making the first statement. Moreover, there is a lack of professionalism,’ said the retired diplomat.

If Bangladesh faces a similar assault in the future, its citizens would naturally expect other nations to voice their disapproval, Mahbub Ullah argued.

He, however, said that Bangladesh’s stance could also be influenced by the welfare of its citizens working in Middle East countries where US military bases exist and which have faced missile attacks.

Mahbub Ullah said that, from an ethical perspective, Iran’s actions were defensible, as it was initially attacked and merely responded.

The professor emphasised that the attack on Iran’s sovereignty and the killing of its supreme leader and other officials cannot be justified under any international law.

‘Such acts represent a law of the jungle. If unchecked, they pose a grave danger to humanity,’ he warned.

Nagorik Oikya president Mahmudur Rahman Manna expressed shock at the foreign ministry’s statements, saying that it appeared to place the burden of resolving the conflict on Iran.

‘The attacks were carried out by the United States, as openly declared by US president Trump, and the killing of Ayatollah Khamenei constitutes a deliberate act of assassination. In this context, the government’s statement is entirely submissive,’ he said.

Communist Party of Bangladesh general secretary Abdullah Al Kafi Ratan said that the government’s statement reflected a submissive approach to imperialism.

‘We condemn this stance and demand that the government immediately protest against the attacks in Iran and the targeted killings of the Iranian supreme leader,’ he said.

Kafi also criticised both the ruling and opposition parties, noting that neither had condemned the actions of the US or Israel, effectively showing deference to American imperialism.

On the other hand, Dhaka University international relations professor Niloy Ranjan Biswas said that Bangladesh seemed to be caught in a ‘diplomatic puzzle’ here.

‘Options for Bangladesh are very limited here. It has to act keeping in view its relations with the United States as well as the Gulf states. Considering the situation, Bangladesh has taken a progressive stand here,’ he opined.

Non-governmental research organisation Centre for Governance Studies executive director Parvez Karim Abbasi said that the new government’s utterances reflect complex economic compulsion and geopolitics as well since at least two Bangladeshis were also killed in the escalating conflict in the Arab states.

‘It seems that the new government is taken aback by the magnitude of the event…The US is the single largest destination for Bangladesh exports, while the Gulf states are the major destinations for Bangladeshi expatriates. So it is important to protect the interest of the country first,’ he added.

Ganosamhati Andolan executive coordinator Abul Hasan Rubel described the US-Israeli attacks as a violation of law and international norms, emphasising that they breached Iran’s sovereignty.

He said that the foreign ministry’s statement should have clearly named those responsible for the attack rather than omitting them.

National Citizen Party senior joint convener Ariful Islam Adeeb described the government’s stance as a one-sided foreign policy.

‘It is clear that the government has failed to present a firm position on the attacks in Iran. The overall foreign policy approach appears vague and non-committal,’ he said.​
 
Analyze

Analyze Post

Add your ideas here:
Highlight Cite Respond

Members Online

Latest Posts

Back
PKDefense - Recommended Toggle