logo
‘I support it completely': Israelis back attack on Iran even as retaliatory missiles hit Tel Aviv

‘I support it completely': Israelis back attack on Iran even as retaliatory missiles hit Tel Aviv

Yahoo12 hours ago

At midnight on Friday Sveta's four-year-old daughter was asleep on the floor outside their shattered apartment block, as the rest of the family weighed up where they should spend the night.
A missile from the first Iranian salvo fired at Tel Aviv had landed a couple of blocks away, killing at least one person, injuring at least 16 others and damaging hundreds of shops and homes in this quiet residential area.
Related: Israel's air might and Iran's nuclear bunkers may make for lengthy conflict
The 37-year-old was sanguine about her own losses, and backed the government decision to attack Iran even though it had so quickly cost her family their home.
'I support it completely,' she said as her older daughter stroked their chihuahua. 'This is nothing compared to what they will be able to do if they get their hand on the A-bomb [nuclear weapons]. We can't afford for the Iranians to get them.
'We tell [our daughters] that as long as we go to the shelter together, everything is OK. The damage in the house is just material things.'
The family's street, in a residential area of Ramat Gan town east of Tel Aviv, was busy with emergency services crunching over shattered glass and other wreckage to reach the building that took a direct hit.
It had been reduced to layers of concrete rubble and twisted steel, with an apparently undamaged cabinet hanging incongruously from the remains of the first floor.
Two hours after the explosion, rescue teams were still searching through the wreckage for survivors, as a drone buzzed overhead when the sirens wailed again.
Iran launched more than 150 missiles at Israeli in five waves overnight, and though most were intercepted, about 10 got through air defences, a military spokesperson said. Those strikes killed three people in the Tel Aviv area and injured more than 70 others around the country.
It was the bloodiest few hours inside Israel since the start of the war in Gaza in October 2023, but the toll was dwarfed by the damage that Israel inflicted on Iran.
Yaniv Nimni's home lost its roof and all its windows in the last barrage just before dawn, when one of the missiles landed in his suburban street in the town of Rishon LeZion, just south of Tel Aviv.
'This is only money, as long as the family are OK, that's what matters,' he said as he surveyed the damage. His only question about the government's decision to hit Iran was why they left it so long. 'It should have been done much earlier,' he said.
Israelis who have become used to occasional strikes from smaller, short-range rockets from Gaza or Lebanon were stunned by the destruction.
For saving lives, the country's shelter network worked. The three people killed in Ramat Gan and Rishon LeZion had been outside protected areas when the missiles struck, authorities said.
The two-storey houses next to Nimni's were stripped back to raw concrete and piles of rubble, their ceilings collapsed, furnishings shredded. Trees in their gardens were snapped to the ground and cars crumpled on the street outside.
At the edge of the police cordon in Ramat Gan, Bar, 31, begged to be allowed back into her building for just a few minutes to pick up a few things for her children.
The family escaped the bombing because they were staying with her parents. Bar realised they'd had a narrow escape when she recognised her home on the news and, after the all-clear, came back to try to check on their apartment.
'They told me I can't go in because of the damage,' she said. 'I'm anxious and in shock, and the kids are very scared. We have nowhere to go, no home to go back to.'
Residents of nearby buildings walked past dragging suitcases and weighed down with backpacks. Most were leaving to stay with friends and relatives, because the city government had declared a mass casualty event and was only offering camp beds in a nearby school.
A few hundred metres down the road Orly, 27, was helping a friend sweep up shattered glass from the window of a friend's beauty salon.
'You see what a ballistic missile does? We are hundreds of metres away here,' she said. 'We were in the shelter when it hit and you felt it. I've been through a couple of wars now and I knew this was different.'
Elia Digma, 18, lives near a high-rise residential building in central Tel Aviv that was hit in the first salvo and had come to inspect the damage. 'It's a miracle only five people were hurt here,' he said. 'It was one hell of a boom, and everything shook.'
Shocked by the destruction and braced for more attacks, he too was still confident that a pre-emptive attack on Iran had been necessary.
'We are doing what we need to defend ourselves,' Elia said. 'The Bible says if someone comes to kill you, you must kill them first. We are ready for anything and everything that will bring quiet.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Israel's Strategy Against Iran: Will It Succeed?
Israel's Strategy Against Iran: Will It Succeed?

Forbes

time4 minutes ago

  • Forbes

Israel's Strategy Against Iran: Will It Succeed?

As the Israel-Iran confrontation extends day after day, while officials claim it could last weeks, it's useful to take a dispassionate look at the goals and likely outcomes. Readers will recall that this columnist covered a comparable events on site in Israel a year or so ago. This after decades of covering the wider region for Newsweek and the Wall Street Journal. So, peering through the fog of war let us find areas of clarity where possible. This latest round of the conflict began with precision strikes by Israel successfully targeting top members of the Iranian regime's military and nuclear leadership. One should pause there a moment and put that in context. Russia and Iran ratified a security treaty in April which, inter alia, included Russian anti-aircraft defenses. Did they not function? What happened to their efficacy? If such a strategic treaty means anything it means at least defending the regime, if not the country. Russia doesn't want regime change in Iran - certainly not a Western-style democracy hostile to Moscow. There will undoubtedly be leaders in Tehran wondering about the value of the Russian alliance, its weapons and guarantees. Or indeed there will be suspicions of Russian perfidy - as happened over Syria. In the first days, Israel limited its attacks to military and nuclear affiliated leaders and sites. Moscow wouldn't (in private) necessarily mind that scenario - it would rather have a non-nuclear Iran on its southern borders anyway or at least one dependent on Russian nuclear installations. Plus Moscow would doubtless welcome the spike in oil prices that a regional conflict spurs - which indeed is happening now. The problem is that the momentum of events is turning into a test of the regime's legitimacy - that is to say, threatening the regime's power. The success of Israel's initial attacks meant Tehran had to respond. And not just as a piece of theatrical son et lumiere as happened last time when Israel got off virtually unscathed. But as Tehran fired back repeatedly and began to get through sporadically, Israel has widened the range of targets. Attacks on energy installations will certainly spike the price of oil. But damaging the regime's oil revenues, blacking out Tehran's electricity grid, and causing civilian disorder definitely weakens the government's grip on power. These latest additional targets, combined with the rising civilian casualties in Israel, constitute an escalation where both sides are striving to alienate the opposing side's public from its leadership. There is some media talk that Israel asked President Trump for permission to take out Supreme Leader Khamenei and Trump refused. This sounds implausible in its literal form. Did they ask permission before launching the attacks in the first place? And taking out other top leaders? If not, then why consult the US about Khamenei? No, it's more likely to be a form of subtle or not-so-subtle messaging - Trump kept Khamenei alive this time. In return, nuclear concessions should be forthcoming otherwise the US might not be able to restrain the Israelis next time. This exact strategy, scaled up, is likely the core calculation of Israel's strategy for the full-scale renewal of hostilities. Why suddenly attack a number of nuclear installations if you can't take them all out in a first strike or after several strikes? Iran has nuclear plants buried deep inside mountains, inaccessible to air strikes and others that would, if flattened, contaminate large areas of the Persian Gulf. Including Arab states potentially friendly to the US and Israel. Short of a ground attack with US troops included, these parts of Iran's nuclear network are to some degree invulnerable. So why then launch the attacks in the first place? The answer lies in the Khamenei protocol above. Remember that top nuclear and military personnel were also neutralized in the first strikes. In other words, because the installations cannot all be destroyed, those responsible for them can and will be. In short, this is a kind of anti-personnel war disguised as a strategic anti-infrastructure campaign. Israel has repeatedly shown that it can knock out vital component parts of hostile leadership from Hezbollah to Iran. That is the nature of this latest Israeli casus belli too. Nuclear and military officials will either negotiate away Iran's nuclear threat or they themselves will pay. The principle applies equally to Khamenei himself. Time will tell if the regime leaders react as desired. Thus far, it seems not. Iran's counterstrikes at Israel and the widening of the domestic damage in each country suggests that a much longer attritional struggle to induce regime change by each side is on the cards.

Could Iran Carry Out Its Threat To Shut Down The Strait Of Hormuz?
Could Iran Carry Out Its Threat To Shut Down The Strait Of Hormuz?

Yahoo

time5 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Could Iran Carry Out Its Threat To Shut Down The Strait Of Hormuz?

The threat of Iran attempting to blockade the highly strategic Strait of Hormuz has re-emerged amid the conflict that has now erupted between it and Israel. Over the years, the Iranians have amassed an arsenal of cruise and ballistic missiles, and kamikaze drones, as well as a slew of maritime capabilities like naval mines, well-suited to the task of shutting down the narrow waterway that links the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman. At the same time, there are questions about the extent to which Israeli strikes may have hampered Iran's ability to follow through on such a threat, or even whether the regime in Tehran would want to take such a drastic step that would have global ramifications. Readers can first get up to speed on the state of the current Israel-Iran conflict, which increasingly includes the targeting of energy infrastructure, in our reporting here. Esmail Kosari (also sometimes written Esmaeil Kousari or Esmaeil Kowsari), currently a member of Iran's parliament and head of the parliamentary committee on defense and national security, has said that closing the Strait of Hormuz is now under serious consideration, according to multiple reports today. The original source of the remarks from Kosari, who also holds the rank of brigadier general in Iran's powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), appears to be a story from the state-run Islamic Republic of Iran News Network (IRINN). 'The Strait of Hormuz remains open and commercial traffic continues to flow uninterrupted,' according to an advisory notice yesterday from the Joint Maritime Information Center of the United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) office. 'Currently, the JMIC has no indications of an increased threat to the Maritime.' This followed earlier advisories from the UKMTO JMIC regarding tensions in the region after Israel began launching strikes on Iran Thursday. UKMTO MSCIO JMIC – ADVISORY 021-25https:// #marsec — UKMTO Ops Centre (@UK_MTO) June 11, 2025 'At the time of this writing, no impact to shipping has been reported' in the region, Ambrey, an international maritime security firm, said in a separate Threat Circular put out after Israel began its latest campaign against Iran. The Strait of Hormuz 'remains open and there are no indications of an increased threat to the Maritime Environment,' Nils Haupt, a spokesman for the Hapag-Lloyd shipping company, told TWZ directly. 'At the moment, we do not see an urge to divert any vessels. But of course: we continue to monitor the situation on an hourly basis.' Haupt also noted his company currently has no ships in either Iranian or Israeli waters. Iran has repeatedly threatened to shut down the Strait of Hormuz, which is just around 20 nautical miles across at its narrowest point, in times of heightened tensions in the past. How narrow the waterway is means that a significant portion of it falls within Iran's national waters, which also overlap with those of Oman to the south. Normal maritime traffic flows in and out through a pair of established two-mile-wide shipping lanes. Roughly a fifth of all global oil shipments, and an even higher percentage of seaborne shipments, pass through the Strait each year. It is also an important route for the movement of liquid natural gas. Some 3,000 ships use it to get to and from the Persian Gulf each month. Closing the Strait of Hormuz would have immediate and potentially dramatic impacts on the global price of oil, which, in turn, could cause significant worldwide economic disruptions. Oil prices had already jumped after Israel launched its new campaign against Iran, which has now expanded to include Iranian energy targets. Naval mines have historically been one of the most immediate options Iran has for trying to bring maritime traffic in the Strait of Hormuz to a halt. Those mines could be seeded relatively rapidly by a wide array of vessels, including the IRGC's extensive fleet of small fast attack boats. The Iranian Navy's separate fleets, including its midget submarines, could easily play a role in mine laying, too. Certain commercial vessels, especially those with onboard cranes, might also be able to assist. Finding and clearing naval mines is an arduous process that presents significant risks even in otherwise benign environments. If Iran is truly serious about shutting down the Strait of Hormuz, an array of other threats would be layered on top to hamper the minesweeping efforts and otherwise block maritime traffic. For one, IRGC and Iranian Navy vessels could also just directly attack or otherwise harass foreign warships and commercial vessels alike. Iran has also shown an ability and willingness to use teams riding in small boats to directly plant limpet mines on the hulls of civilian ships, as well as board and seize them, in the past. Many of Iran's naval vessels, including various types of smaller fast attack craft, are armed with anti-ship cruise missiles. It has surface warships, semi-submersibles, and the aforementioned midget submarines that can launch attacks using torpedoes, anti-tank guided missiles, unguided artillery rockets, and other weapons, as well. Furthermore, Iranian maritime forces actively train to employ swarming tactics to help overwhelm any enemy defenses. In recent years, Iran has also fielded a number of cargo ships converted into 'motherships' for launching cruise and ballistic missiles and drones, as well as what it claims to be a 'drone carrier.' TWZ has explored the potential capabilities of these ships in the past, but the actual roles they might play in a stand-up confrontation around the Strait of Hormuz seem limited. Especially in this constrained environment, they would present large and easy-to-find targets for opponents to attack. Iran's IRGC published a video today of launching a ballistic missile from their forward base Shahid Mahdavi (converted container ship). — Mehdi H. (@mhmiranusa) February 13, 2024 2. Second video shows the takeoff & landing of Ababil-3 drone on the IRGCN drone carrier named Shahid Bahman Bagheri. — Mehdi H. (@mhmiranusa) February 6, 2025 Iran has also been steadily developing uncrewed surface vessels and undersea vehicles capable of launching kamikaze attacks to its arsenal. Though the ongoing war in Ukraine has now fully demonstrated the very real threats these capabilities present to ships and coastal targets, and even aerial threats, Iran, together with its Houthi allies in Yemen, has now long been a pioneer in this space. Shore-launched anti-ship cruise and ballistic missiles, as well as kamikaze drones, are another key component of the threats Iran could bring to bear in the Strait of Hormuz. This is only compounded by the narrowness of the waterway, which offers very limited room to maneuver, especially for large ships in the face of high-volume saturation attacks. The prospect of Iran turning the Strait into a super missile and drone engagement zone is a particularly worrisome scenario that TWZ has regularly called attention to in the past. Israel's strikes on Iran since Thursday do raise questions about the extent to which Iran could follow through on any threat to blockade the Strait of Hormuz. In addition to starting nuclear facilities, a particularly major focus of Israeli operations so far has been hobbling Iranian ballistic missile capabilities. A satellite image from Planet Labs taken on June 12 had also raised the possibility of Israel targeting IRGC naval assets at a base on the Persian Gulf, but this remains very much unconfirmed. This is not a location the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) has so far included in its otherwise expansive claims of targets struck across Iran. Iran's 'drone carrier' Shahid Bagheri and Shahid Mahdavi mothership vessel have also been observed leaving their homeport in Bandar Abbas, where they would be very vulnerable to strikes. Planet imagery acquired 0725Z 13JUN2025 suggests the IRGCN naval base west of Bostanoo was likely targeted during Israel's airstrikes. — War Report (@WarReportage) June 13, 2025 Bandar Abbas After the initial attack overnight, there has been some movement at the naval baseAt first look both drone motherships ( IRGC Shahid Bagheri & IRIS Shahid Mahdavi) appeared to have left After taking a closer look, they just moved ~6 km to the west. Both… — MT Anderson (@MT_Anderson) June 13, 2025 From nuclear sites to air defense systems, we've dismantled some of Iran's most dangerous military a breakdown of the key targets struck across Iran: — Israel Defense Forces (@IDF) June 14, 2025 At the same, as TWZ has already noted in our reporting on the current Iran-Israel conflict, Iran has a significant ability to disperse its ballistic and cruise missiles. This, in turn, makes them immensely more difficult to track and attack preemptively, and creates additional uncertainty around where threats may suddenly emerge. In addition, as mentioned earlier, the process of clearing naval mines, especially while under attack from other threats, is generally slow-going and dangerous. The U.S. Navy and others have been working to mitigate those risks, including through the increasing use of uncrewed surface and undersea platforms. Still, depending on how many mines Iran is able to lay, an operation to conclusively remove them could take a long time, potentially weeks or even months. It is worth noting here that the campaign by Yemen's Houthis against commercial shipping and foreign warships in and around the Red Sea since October 2023 has now proven out many of the exact capabilities and tactics that Iran could employ in the Strait of Hormuz. The Yemeni militants have also demonstrated how relatively limited threats to civilian vessels can have outsized impacts, even in the face of active foreign intervention. Despite U.S. and foreign forces patrolling the waters around the Red Sea and directly engaging Houthi targets ashore, commercial maritime traffic through that region had largely collapsed last year. Ships were forced to avoid the Suez Canal for a far longer route around the Horn of Africa, creating nearly $200 billion in new costs for the maritime shipping industry collectively. The situation has begun to improve somewhat as Houthi attacks have declined, particularly following a ceasefire deal between the United States and the Yemeni militants in May. However, there are fears that the trend will now reverse again given the current geopolitical climate. Iran has already separately threatened to target U.S. and other foreign forces in the Middle East if they help defend Israel from its missile and drone attacks. The Iranians could seek to launch similar attacks on third parties in response to any efforts to keep the Strait of Hormuz open. According to Reuters, Iran has warned the United States, United Kingdom and France that their bases and ships in the region will be targeted if they assist in the defense of Israel against ballistic missiles launched by Tehran. — OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) June 14, 2025 All this being said, the Red Sea can still be bypassed, but there is no other outlet for commercial shipping from the Persian Gulf than the Strait of Hormuz. As such, Iran even attempting to blockade the waterway would present far further reaching regional and global implications that would draw responses on various levels from foreign powers around the world. In particular, Gulf Arab states, already historically at odds with Iran and aligned with the United States, would be pressured to act, or at least support some kind of intervention, given the impacts to their heavily oil and natural gas-dependent economies. Those countries could look to move oil and natural gas elsewhere across the Arabian Peninsula for export, but not being able to leverage established facilities on the Persian Gulf would still have consequences. Iran has an acute awareness of the risks involved given its experience during the Tanker War sideshow to the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s, which prompted a major reaction from the U.S. military. The potential for a repeat of the Tanker War has since been an important factor in U.S. force posture and contingency response planning in the Middle East. More recently, the U.S. military has taken steps to try to build a broader international coalition presence to help ensure the Strait of Hormuz remains free and open. From what has been seen so far, Iran has been looking to deter the U.S. military, especially, from taking an active offensive role alongside Israel in the current conflict. It is hard to see how any attempt to block maritime traffic in the region would not have the exact opposite effect. Closing the Strait of Hormuz would run the additional risk of alienating Iran's foreign partners, especially China, which imports significant amounts of Iranian and other Middle East oil. 'China does not want the flow of oil out of the Persian Gulf to be disrupted in any way, and China does not want the price of oil to rise,' Ellen Wald, president of Transversal Consulting, told CNBC for a story published yesterday. 'So they're going to bring the full weight of their economic power to bear on Iran.' The revenue from oil and natural gas shipments is vital to Iran itself, and could be even more so in the aftermath of the current conflict. Disruptions to seaborne commerce would have other impacts for the regime in Tehran. In recent months, reports had notably said that Iran had been stepping up imports of chemicals from China that can be used to produce fuel for its missiles. The Iranian armed forces also import other kinds of military hardware from China, as well as Russia. 'Their friends will suffer more than their enemies … So it's very hard to see that happening,' Anas Alhajji, a managing partner at Energy Outlook Advisors, also told CBNC. 'It's not in their interest to cause problems because they will suffer first.' Whether or not Iran might become less inured to the risks of touching off new regional and global crises with enemies and allies as Israel's campaign of strikes continues remains to be seen. The regime in Tehran could feel pressured to take drastic measures, in general, if it perceives its existence as being at risk. If the order were to be given in Tehran, mining and other measures could be implemented quickly, at least to a degree that could be highly disruptive, even if U.S. and other forces react with similar speed. Even if the Strait is not fully shut down, impacts would be felt. U.S. or other foreign forces would face challenges restoring confidence that the passage is safe, especially with the effort that would be required to hunt down mobile missile launchers ashore. Any operations in response to Iranian movements at sea or on land would be conducted in a hostile air and maritime environment, including the anti-ship missile super engagement zone described earlier, and which would extend beyond the immediate confines of the Strait. Supporting tasks like the suppression and destruction of enemy air defenses and intelligence-gathering would be critical. In turn, a major force package would have to be put together and immense resources expended. 'The response from Iran, its proxies and allies is unknown and any effect on the maritime environment is not predictable,' the UKMTO JMIC cautioned in its advisory notice yesterday. 'Given the proximity of regional flashpoints to major maritime routes and chokepoints, the potential for rapid escalation involving the maritime environment should not be discounted. The threat from the Houthis, who have publicly stated their intent to respond if the U.S. is perceived to be involved, increases the threat of a broader regional impact.' Altogether, there are significant questions about Iran's capacity to blockade the Strait of Hormuz and its overall willingness to do so, but it remains a worrisome potentiality that would send out ripples globally. Contact the author: howard@

Armada Of USAF Tankers Just Deployed East Over Atlantic Spurring Speculation
Armada Of USAF Tankers Just Deployed East Over Atlantic Spurring Speculation

Yahoo

time7 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Armada Of USAF Tankers Just Deployed East Over Atlantic Spurring Speculation

Over two dozen U.S. Air Force KC-135R and KC-46A tankers from across the United States appeared on flight-tracking software yesterday evening, taking off from their bases and heading east over the Atlantic. It isn't clear if they were 'dragging' any combat aircraft with them, but there wasn't any obvious signs of that. While tanker movements in this direction are far from abnormal, such a large, near-simultaneous migration of the jets was very peculiar, especially at a time of extreme crisis in the Middle East. The exact reason for the mass deployment is unclear, although many of the potential answers would indicate a change, or preparations for a potential change, in the current conflict between Israel and Iran. 28 now. — Evergreen Intel (@vcdgf555) June 16, 2025 Open-source enthusiasts took to social media after all the tankers began popping up on flight tracking software. At its peak, it appeared that at least 28 tankers were all heading east. While there is a multinational exercise in Norway that is about to kick off, that wouldn't require anything like this level of relocation of refueling assets. There is no other apparent exercise or commitment that would necessitate such an operation. On the other hand, these are precisely the assets that would be needed if the United States were going to change its support of Israel's Operation Rising Lion, or if there were urgent concerns that the conflict is about to widen significantly. Outside of some sort of unlikely signalling move, an undisclosed massive exercise, or some other yet-to-be-known long-established commitment, there are four possible explanations for the movements in the context of the Iran-Israel war. Keep in mind that some of these possibilities could be pre-decisional. In other words, the movement of assets could be happening now so that a wide array of contingencies are prepared for and executable options are available very quickly if need be. 1) The U.S. has decided or is preparing for the possibility that it will provide Israel with aerial refueling support to dramatically accelerate its offensive air operations over Iran. As we have discussed repeatedly for years, and especially since this conflict kicked off, Israel lacks robust aerial refueling capabilities, with just a handful of aging 707 tankers (around seven operational) available to support hundreds of fighter aircraft. This is a massively limiting factor when it comes to sortie generation for long-range strikes into Iran. It also severely limits how long aircraft can remain on station once in their assigned target area and how deeply they can penetrate into Iranian territory. As Israel gains air superiority further east over Iran, aerial tanking becomes even more important. It also allows fighters to employ direct attack weapons, as opposed to much more expensive, and, in some cases, less effective standoff munitions. Bringing the Israeli Air Force's heaviest bunker-busters to bear on targets will require Israeli aircraft to be in close proximity to them, in particular. Additional tanker support would greatly help with these efforts. Arguably more importantly, aerial refueling will enable much better effectiveness when it comes to hunting for and interdicting Iran's theater ballistic missiles before they can be launched. This is very challenging mission to accomplish at scale under any circumstances, but even more so when fighter aircraft can only remain over a search area for a matter of minutes before they have to head back for gas. The successful attacks on Israel by Iran using theater ballistic missiles could help justify support for this effort with U.S. tanker capacity. This is especially true if U.S. and Israeli stocks of extremely expensive and hard-to-construct missile interceptors are running low. So, gaining more aerial refueling capacity will enhance just about every facet of Israel's tactical jet operations, multiplying the available force to a significant degree. The U.S. can provide exactly this support at scale. Doing so would also keep the U.S. technically out of the direct kinetic fight, although Iran would probably see that claim differently. 2) Joining the kinetic fight. This would mean the U.S. would enter the air war directly, or is preparing to be more capable of executing that option. These tankers would be needed for such operations, as well as for refueling Israeli aircraft. This, of course, would be a massive shift in U.S. policy, and it could have cascading effects throughout the region, especially in terms of the likelihood that Iran would start targeting American installations. This scenario could also work in reverse if Iran targeted American interests in the region, with the U.S. then entering the direct conflict. Having the tankers pre-positioned for such a contingency would be very helpful. 3) Preparing to deal with Iran attempting to close the Strait of Hormuz. If this were to occur, U.S. and likely Arab gulf state military aircraft would leap into action in an attempt to curtail the operation. This would mean the war would instantly widen, and this cannot be done just by going out and sinking small boats. It would require a massive operation that includes SEAD/DEAD and persistent surveillance aircraft sorties. It also means having to hunt for highly mobile shore-based anti-ship missile launchers on a grand scale — an incredibly challenging task. Once again, this would demand large amounts of continuous tanker support. You can read our complete report on the plausibility of Iran closing the strait and what it would take to break Iran's grip on the waterway in a very recent feature here. 4) Providing a robust air bridge from the U.S. to the Middle East. This may be the most likely option as it would be needed if major assets are going to start flowing into the region, or at least the option to support such actions is being put into place now. This would include many types of aircraft, and especially fighters. It could also be put in place to support global airpower bomber missions from the United States to Iran and back. American B-2s are the only known conventional assets that have the potential capability of badly disabling or destroying Iran's deepest underground components of its nuclear program. We have constantly highlighted this scenario for many years. Pre-positioning a tanker bridge spanning the Atlantic to the Middle East would be needed to support those heavily-laden B-2 operations. This same bridge can also help American assets get out of the region if the United States evacuates its sprawling bases there out of fears of massive Iranian bombardment. Contingencies include: -opting to provide AR to IAF.-Joining the kinetic offensive fight (offensive) -Dealing countering an attempt to close the strait (defensive)-Providing BM left of launch interdiction/hunt (defensive) -Providing a robust bridge for global airpower bomber… — Tyler Rogoway (@Aviation_Intel) June 16, 2025 It's worth noting that other assets also appear to be heading in Iran's direction, including a U.S. carrier strike group heading into the Indian Ocean from the South China Sea as this is being published. USS Nimitz is about to transit Malacca Strait, likely heading to CENTCOM AOR. — Duan Dang (@duandang) June 16, 2025 We will just have to wait and see what exactly all this is about. We have reached out to the USAF for any details they can provide. Contact the author: Tyler@

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store