Fire erupts near Microsoft office in southern Israel as Iran continues offensive: Reports
Live Events
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
Israel's southern city of Beer Sheva witnessed several fires on a street close to a tech park that includes a Microsoft office, Reuters reported, citing CNN.According to CNN, emergency services are responding to the fires Israel's military said it intercepted an Iranian missile.The southern district saw several parts targeted by munitions said Israel Police, adding that there was property damage but no reports of casualties.Yesterday, a major hospital in Beer Sheva, the Soroka Medical Center, was damaged in an Iranian attack.Beer Sheva is in the Negev desert, where Israel's Nevatim airbase is located.On Thursday, a direct hit on a hospital in the southern part was reported, Israel Defense Forces said in a post on Thursday.The Soroka Medical Center, targeted by Iran, is the main hospital in Israel's south and has over 1,000 beds and provides services to the approximately 1 million residents of the area."Several hits were identified as a result of the missile barrage—one of them hitting the largest hospital in southern Israel," the IDF posted on X.According to Magen David Adom rescue service, at least 40 people were wounded.As per AFP, a spokesperson for the hospital said that damage has been caused to the hospital and extensive damage in various areas. "We are currently assessing the damage, including injuries. We ask the public not to come to the hospital at this time," they said.Many hospitals in Israel are said to have activated emergency plans in the past week, converting underground parking to hospital floors and move patients underground, especially those who are on ventilators or are difficult to move quickly.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NDTV
15 minutes ago
- NDTV
What Is 'Doomsday Plane' Spotted In US Skies Amid Iran-Israel Conflict
New Delhi: As tensions continue to flare between Israel and Iran, and Washington ponders over potential military action against the Islamic Republic, one of the US' most secretive aircraft quietly entered the skies above the US capital. On the night of June 17, the E-4B Nightwatch — a hardened airborne command centre built to keep America's top defence and security officials operational during a nuclear crisis — made a flight to Joint Base Andrews. Known as the 'doomsday plane,' the aircraft was spotted by flight trackers taking an unusually circuitous route to Washington, triggering speculation about its timing and purpose. What is the E-4B Nightwatch? The E-4B Nightwatch is a militarised version of the Boeing 747-200. It was repurposed by the US military into a flying war room. It is formally known as the National Airborne Operations Center (NAOC) and is designed to function as a mobile command post during a nuclear conflict or national catastrophe. When ground-based communication or leadership infrastructure is compromised, the E-4B helps top American officials to continue coordinating operations from the sky. It functions as an airborne command centre, enabling the President, Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff to maintain command, control and communication capabilities during times of national emergency. Why is it called the 'doomsday plane'? The aircraft is built to withstand nuclear blasts, electromagnetic pulses (EMPs) and other extreme disruptions. It is often described as the 'flying Pentagon' because of its ability to operate as a command-and-control centre even in the event of full-scale war. The E-4B has an unrefuelled endurance of 12 hours, but with mid-air refuelling, it is known to have remained airborne for as long as 35.4 hours, according to a report in The New York Post. Is its recent flight a cause of concern? E-4B flights are not uncommon. They are conducted regularly to maintain operational readiness — this particular sortie stood out. As per data from flight tracking site FlightRadar, the aircraft departed Bossier City, Louisiana, shortly before 6 pm, local time, on June 17 and touched down in Maryland around 10 pm, The New York Times reported. What drew attention was the flight path, which curved along the eastern coastline and looped over Virginia and North Carolina before heading to Maryland. Even more unusual was the callsign — instead of the routine ORDER6, the aircraft used ORDER01. E-4B flight amid geopolitical tensions? The flight coincided with an escalation in the ongoing Israel-Iran conflict. US President Donald Trump has demanded Iran's 'unconditional surrender' as the conflict continues to escalate, according to AP. Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, issued a warning to the US, threatening 'irreparable damage' if it directly intervened. FlightRadar data showed two Iranian government aircraft departed the country's airspace on Wednesday for Oman. It fuelled speculation that Iranian officials might be evacuating amid rising tensions, or that urgent diplomatic talks were being arranged in Muscat, Oman's capital, reported The New York Post. How many E-4B aircraft are there? The United States Air Force operates four E-4Bs, all as part of the 1st Airborne Command and Control Squadron. At any given time, at least one aircraft is on high alert and ready for immediate deployment.
Economic Times
16 minutes ago
- Economic Times
As US weighs Iran strike, Pakistan tries to recast itself as anti-terror ally — and India is watching closely
New Delhi: India is watching closely as Pakistan tries to reinvent itself as a victim of terrorism and is seeking to find a place as a key actor against extremism and a possible ally to the US in the conflict with several accounts, the meeting between Pakistani Field Marshal Asim Munir and US President Donald Trump lasted almost three hours, extending beyond the one hour allocated, and included key US administration advisors for West growing conflict in the region - with the attack on Iranian nuclear facilities by Israel overshadowing other issues and increasingly pointing towards a US intervention - has placed Pakistan in an advantageous position that it will try to leverage, people tracking the situation the core of Pakistani moves, sources feel, is an attempt to rebrand itself from a fountainhead of terrorism to a victim that is seeking Western help to counter outfits that present threats to the West. This is an old plot that Pakistan has successfully played against the West in the past before the discovery of Osama Bin Laden at Abbottabad and the subsequent distancing of the US administration and pulling back of military aid. A renewed attempt is being made, with the Iran crisis coming at a particularly fortunate time for Pakistan as the US looks for allies who can pressurise Tehran and provide support in case American forces decide to enter the battlefield. Sources said Pakistan has managed to find some success in getting to Washington DC by exploiting the gap in the Pentagon that exists due to the structuring of its military commands across the world. The US Central Command (CENTCOM), which deals with Pakistan, is at the centre of action right now due to the troubles in West Asia. The Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) which deals with India and China was earlier more central to decision-making and planning in Washington DC. Its views of Pakistan as a close partner of China, increasingly dependent on Beijing for military equipment, training and intelligence, were a counter to the CENTCOM's motives of using Pakistani support for anti-terror operations in its area of said Pakistan is likely to use the situation to play the US against China, though in the long term it will remain dependent on Beijing for weapons, training and funding. The worry is, that in the short run, Pakistan may bargain to get access to US equipment and technology in the garb of fighting terror. It has been seen in the past, including when India attacked terror camps in Balakot in 2019, that equipment provided to Pakistan to fight terrorism were used against at stake for India will be the partnership with the US that has been growing in the military sphere and includes plans to co-develop cutting edge weapon systems. India has been increasing its dependence on the US for critical defence equipment, including engines for indigenous LCAs, maritime surveillance equipment and satellite difference is that while India is seeking technology and equipment from the US to counter an increasingly aggressive China, Pakistan may try to seek the same against India, in the garb of fighting terrorism.
Mint
17 minutes ago
- Mint
How to give diplomacy a chance with Iran
Next Story Business News/ Opinion / Views/ How to give diplomacy a chance with Iran Wesley Clark , The Wall Street Journal Trump can use the threat of military action to defang the regime and avoid creating a failed state. A U.S. aircraft carrier, May 28. Photo: edward jacome/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images Gift this article The world is waiting anxiously to see whether the U.S. will strike Iran. President Trump is considering two tracks for approaching the conflict: military action or diplomacy. If he plays his cards right, he can accomplish both, crippling the regime for good. The world is waiting anxiously to see whether the U.S. will strike Iran. President Trump is considering two tracks for approaching the conflict: military action or diplomacy. If he plays his cards right, he can accomplish both, crippling the regime for good. America can engage militarily at any time. No doubt the Pentagon has proposed several courses of action, ranging from B-2 strikes on Iran's Fordow enrichment site using 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs to a full-fledged joint military campaign with Israel to take out Iran's potential retaliatory tools, disable its defenses, and send in special forces to confirm nuclear sites have been destroyed. These variations are part of the track-one option. Mr. Trump, however, has the leverage to achieve a track-two approach: a diplomatic solution that would defang the regime. Mr. Trump could require Iran to stop all its nuclear efforts and give up uranium enrichment permanently, renounce its aims to destroy Israel and the U.S., end its hegemonic aspirations, and cease supporting terrorism. In return, the U.S. wouldn't destroy Iran with military force. The U.S., in conjunction with the International Atomic Energy Agency, would inspect and decommission all existing Iranian nuclear sites and implement regular inspections to prevent Iran from ever again seeking nuclear weapons. When Iran wants nuclear power for civilian infrastructure, it can purchase U.S. reactors and externally enriched uranium with appropriate safeguards. Mr. Trump need not rush to decide whether to strike Iran. With each passing day, Tehran expends its arsenal and is weakened by Israel's air attacks. This gives Mr. Trump strong footing and rare bargaining power. If the U.S. joins Israel in attacking Iran, then the leverage against the ayatollah and his government will be even greater. Engaging militarily—pursuing some range of track-one tactics—would not end the opportunity for a track-two diplomatic path but would only enhance it. The critical question the Trump administration must ask: What is our desired end goal? If it is to end the threat of a theocratic, nuclear-armed terrorist state that is determined to destroy other nations, then we must consider how that could be best achieved. We must also be realistic and consider which is more likely to produce another failed state—a diplomatic solution or a military campaign. We have seen the end results of four major U.S. military campaigns since 1999. Three were military successes but resulted in costly failures in the aftermath because of a lack of forethought and planning. After the Taliban's collapse in 2001, the U.S. attempted to help Afghanistan establish a new government. Efforts to stabilize the country failed, and the Taliban rules again. In 2003, after capturing Saddam Hussein, the U.S. failed to plan seriously for Iraq's future. As a result, Iraq has become a magnet for terrorism and a major source of migrants. And while the U.S. fought a long campaign against ISIS in Syria and Iraq, the potential for a resurgence of terrorism remains. Only in 1999, when U.S. and North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces engaged in a 78-day air campaign to end ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, was the end state successful. There are a few reasons for this: The country already had a democratically organized and popular political party, led by Ibrahim Rugova, as well as an armed resistance army. NATO had already planned and agreed to secure the country and help end the fighting. A combination of NATO's air campaign and diplomatic pressure from Finnish and Russian leaders led Slobodan Milosevic, then president of Yugoslavia, to realize that he had no alternative but to accept NATO's terms and end the ethnic cleansing. Iran today is also clearly losing, so the U.S. shouldn't take Iran's threats and angry bluster to mean the door on diplomacy is closed. Israel has the momentum to sustain its air campaign for weeks while Iran exhausts its inventory of missiles, depletes its military and industrial base and loses more of its command and control. Time isn't on Iran's side; the ayatollah and his remaining leadership know this. Air power alone, however, can't guarantee the end of Iran's nuclear ambitions. To rid Iran of its nuclear capabilities through military action would require a level of in-country military engagement that Americans have come to abhor. History shows us that successful diplomacy starts with an achievable endgame. 'Regime change" is a whispered goal. But absent a thoughtful, well-planned effort led by Israel and the U.S., Iran could end up as another failed state—a hotbed for further terrorism, insurgency and migrant outflows. If the West acts as a bystander, it's possible that the Iranian people would overthrow the government. But then what? What guarantee do we have that a successor regime won't relaunch Iran's nuclear ambitions? The most rational endgame is to give the mullahs a choice: Give up uranium enrichment and the nuclear ambitions it enables. Give up the proxy terror war against Israel and its supporters. In return, escape more-severe military attacks and the crippling sanctions that have decimated the Iranian economy. The U.S. should allow the mullahs to survive but should leave government to the Iranian people. Enable Iranians to engage in open and internationally supervised elections, with the hope of Persia's return to peace and prosperity. The U.S. has a rare opportunity to combine the leverage of a military campaign with strategic diplomacy to force Iran's remaining leadership to confront their real choice: likely being overthrown and killed by their own people, or giving up their aggressive ambitions and renouncing their hold on government. If they choose wrongly, they will reap the consequences. The power is in our hands. Do we have the wisdom, gained by painful experience, to achieve a more peaceful Middle East? Mr. Clark, a retired U.S. Army general, served as NATO's supreme allied commander Europe, 1997-2000. Topics You May Be Interested In Catch all the Business News, Market News, Breaking News Events and Latest News Updates on Live Mint. Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates.
