Iran's chilling warning to kill '50,000 US soldiers' as British military bases on high alert
Iran has said it will kill as many as 50,000 US soldiers as the British military remains on high alert for an attack in retaliation to the devastating strikes at Iranian bases.
Mullahs in Tehran have asserted they are still a threat to the US and its allies in the Middle East and elsewhere, after Donald Trump bombed three nuclear sites last weekend, following strikes on the country by Israel.
State television showed a map of American bases across the Middle East which could potentially be targeted by Iranian missiles due to being in close range, including those in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, Bahrain and Iraq, the Mirror reports.
Its anchor Mehdi Khanalizadeh said: "It is now clearer than ever, not just for the Iranian nation but for the whole peoples of the region, that all US citizens and military personnel are legitimate targets.
"We were negotiating and progressing through a diplomatic path, but you chose to spill the blood of your soldiers. The US president in the Oval Office chose to take delivery of the coffins of up to 50,000 US soldiers in Washington."
The editor of the country's Keyhan newspaper also shared his own warning as part of the regime, writing: "It is now our turn to immediately rain missiles down on the US naval force in Bahrain as a first measure."
However, US officials have also been defiant, announcing the attacks successfully wounded Iran's nuclear programme. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu offered his praise to Trump for launching the assault he said would "change history" in preventing Iran from developing a nuclear weapon.
Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community!
Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today.
You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland.
No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team.
All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in!
If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'.
We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like.
To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'.
If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice.
British officials have expressed caution, warning its military bases had been placed on high alert. Defence Secretary John Healey wrote in a column for The Telegraph: "The safety of UK personnel and bases is my top priority. Force protection is at its highest level, and we deployed additional jets this week."
Senior defence officials have concerns Iran could launch devastating drone attacks on bases, following Ukraine's success in targeting Russian military sites, affecting 40 aircraft, some nuclear-capable.
Sir Keir Starmer previously confirmed extra RAF fighter jets would be sent to the Middle East in an effort to enhance security at UK bases.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
8 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump's DC crackdown will do little to prevent crime, advocates say: ‘That's not what creates safety'
Donald Trump's hyperbolic portrayal of crime in major American cities, and his deployment of the national guard in Washington DC ostensibly in an effort to combat it, have reignited a decades-old debate about crime, violence and which policies and approaches can address it. The US president has cited cities such as Oakland, Philadelphia and Chicago as examples of places overwhelmed by crime and violence. He has put forward an increased militarization of law enforcement, and more money and legal protections for police, as the most effective ways to address homicides and other violent crime. But to violence prevention workers, the recent statements appeared made not out of care and concern for the lower-income Black and Latino victims who bear an outsized share of the nation's crimes, but to undermine and dismiss the progress community groups have made. And, the advocates argue, the administration's emphasis on law enforcement and prosecution as the sole ways to stop crime will do little to stop the cycles of violence and property crime that these groups have faced through Republican and Democratic administrations alike. 'The police are about response. But that's not what creates safety,' said Aqeela Sherrills, a longtime community violence intervention leader in Los Angeles. 'A lot of our urban communities have been war zones because they lack investment in infrastructure and programming. It's really disheartening to hear the president of the United States put out misinformation.' Sherrills began his career in violence prevention in Watts in the early 90s. Since then he's been a leading force in several organisations that work intensely with the small portion of a city's population responsible for the most violence in an effort to prevent crime and support victims of crime. Throughout his tenure, he said, he had seen the biggest successes in violence reduction come through training local non-profits, community leaders and officials on different violence community prevention models and then allowing them to build bespoke strategies from there. Over the decades, various models have seen major successes. Some deploy violence prevention workers to middle and high schools. In other programs, they use probation officers as a conduit to connect with young adults who are carrying and using firearms illegally. Some programs send workers to hospitals after a shooting, in an effort to prevent retaliatory violence. Some models rely on a police-community partnership, others don't involve police at all. But most programs center on connecting with mostly young men and teenage boys whose conflicts spill out on to city streets, traumatizing entire neighborhoods. This method has shown promise, research shows, In 2024 the Brooklyn community of Baltimore went a year without homicides after deploying a program called Safe Streets. And cities such as Oakland, Seattle and Philadelphia, where city leaders have invested in similar gun violence reduction programs, have seen drops in homicides when the programs were thriving, according to the Major Cities Chiefs Association's violent crime survey. And while the reasons for the ebb and flow of homicides can't be reduced to one program or strategy, those working to build these programs up have been fighting for credit and acknowledgment. During the Biden administration, they got it. Their approaches finally found federal support with the creation of an office of gun violence prevention and federal dollars for community prevention groups working on the ground. In past years, programs have expanded across the US as more municipalities build their own offices of violence prevention. But these insights don't appear to inform the Trump administration's approach, Sherrills adds. 'He's not reading the data, he's not looking at the trends and reports, it's just more kneejerk reactions,' he said. 'It's shortsighted because they're only speaking about one aspect of our criminal legal system.' This most recent crime debate comes nearly four months after the Trump administration cut nearly $170m in grants from gun violence prevention organizations, including several groups founded and co-founded by Sherrills who have had to lay off several staff members, dealing a serious blow to critical summertime programming. For small, upstart organizations this loss of funds puts their work in jeopardy, said Fredrick Womack, whose organization, Operation Good, lost 20% of its budget due to the April cuts. Womack says he was dismayed to hear the list of cities that Trump singled out, because they are all cities with Black leaders who have invested in community violence intervention. The calls for increased police and potential military presences, he says, shows a disconnect between the halls of power and the needs of the people most affected by violent crime. 'How is the military going to provide support for victims when they need someone who's going to be compassionate to what they're going through?' He asked. 'I know people want justice, but they also need support. They need healing and counseling. 'They won't go into the projects and ask the people how life is going for you. But they'll look at someone who lives in the hills who heard a gunshot two miles away last week and say: 'We have a crime problem,'' he continued. Womack founded Operation Good in 2013, and since then he and his small staff and gaggle of volunteers have worked with the teenagers and young men responsible for most of the city's violence and given them odd jobs and taken them to civil rights museums so they can understand where they come from and gain a sense of community. Womack's work has made a difference: in the years since the pandemic – which saw nationwide surges of gun violence – the homicide rate started to tick down, a change city officials have attributed in part to the work of community-based groups including Operation Good, and their collaboration with the police. Community leaders also argue that not only will Trump's approach be less effective, it's not aimed at helping the people most affected by violence. During a 12 August press conference, Jeanine Pirro, the former Fox News host who was recently appointed the US attorney for DC, argued that Trump's rhetoric about crime and his administration's approach to violence in DC were done in the name of victims. Flanked by posters of mostly Black teenagers and children killed by gun violence, Pirro argued that policies including DC's Youth Rehabilitation Act have only emboldened perpetrators. 'I guarantee you that every one of these individuals was shot and killed by someone who felt they were never gonna be caught,' Pirro told reporters. And when reporters asked about addressing the root causes of crime and violence and the recent cuts to community-based programs, Pirro argued that her focus is on being punitive, not preventive. For Leia Schenk, a Sacramento-based victim and violence prevention advocate, these sorts of sentiments, while common among conservatives, miss the point. 'It's tone-deaf and an oxymoron. The root causes are why we have victims,' Schenk said. 'In my experience [crime and violence] come from systemic oppression. Meaning if a family can't feed their kids, they're gonna steal, rob or commit some sort of fraud to just live and survive.' Schenk has been working in the community advocacy space for more than three decades and in that time has seen the most successful approaches to youth crime, shootings and other forms of violence happen when schools districts, local mental and physical healthcare systems get a level of investment that matches the scale of the problem. 'We're seeing the most success when we are supported – from schools to law enforcement to churches – their support allows us to do what we're doing on a bigger scale.' Despite the comments and moves from the Trump administration, Sherrills says the field of violence prevention will continue to thrive thanks to a strong foundation that was fortified in recent years due to federal support and increased support from philanthropic groups. 'We know that we're in challenging times but it's about doubling down on success and making sure we preserve the wins,' he said. 'We're going to continue to see violence trend down because of the work practitioners are doing in the field. Folks are tired of the killing and the dying and are looking for alternative ways to create better ways of navigating a conflict so that it doesn't lead to violence.'
The Independent
31 minutes ago
- The Independent
Trump's critics say Putin ‘flattered' Trump at the Alaska summit. Europe's leaders aim to do the same
His summit with Vladimir Putin is over, though the fallout continues. On Friday, the U.S. literally rolled out the red carpet for the Russian leader and accused war criminal as he arrived in Anchorage for Ukraine peace talks -- though no Ukrainians were invited to the meeting. Trump flew back to Washington having publicly walked back his own call for a ceasefire and having reportedly endorsed a Russian demand for Ukraine to cede the entirety of the Donbas region, including territory currently controlled by Ukrainian forces. Having completed one of his characteristically chummy conversations with Putin, Trump now faces the so-called 'coalition of the willing': a group of European leaders united behind the defense of Ukraine and adamant that no agreement can be made without the support of Kyiv. The president's guests could strike a very different tone, given how Trump's last face-to-face meeting with Volodymyr Zelensky in the Oval Office devolved into a near-shouting match. But there are indications that Zelensky's allies want to avoid that spectacle and instead lean on figures with whom Trump enjoys warmer relations as they seek to perform damage control: including, chiefly, walking back Trump from his support for any agreement that would cede Ukrainian territory not already occupied by Russian forces. And European leaders are also insistent that Ukrainian officials, including Zelensky, be directly involved in peace talks with Russia — something which it had appeared U.S. officials had successfully pushed Putin towards in May, only for Russia to delay and demur. The sheer size of the delegation heading to Washington on Monday seems to suggest that a show of force is Zelensky's aim. Besides the Ukrainian leader, joining Trump at the White House will be British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, Finnish president Alexander Stubb, German chancellor Friedrich Merz, French president Emmanuel Macron, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, the EU's Ursula von der Leyen along with Nato's secretary-general Mark Rutte. Though large, the choice of members was not random. Each member of the posse has, in their own dealings with Trump, cultivated friendly relations with the U.S. president — save for Zelensky, who clashed with Trump when he visited in February. Publicly, those headed to the White House were positive on the effects of Trump's summit. "President Trump's efforts have brought us closer than ever before to ending Russia's illegal war in Ukraine,' Starmer said. The British prime minister and his counterparts could be relying on Trump's tendency to rapidly change his position as he and other European leaders launch a charm offensive. Though none of Trump's European counterparts will say it, critics of the Republican president in the U.S. called Friday's summit a 'setback' for Ukrainians and Europe at large. 'Vladimir Putin got the red carpet treatment on American soil. But we got no ceasefire, no imminent meeting between Putin and Zelensky,' Sen. Chris Van Hollen, a Democrat, said Sunday on ABC's This Week. He added Trump was 'flattered' by the Russian president. U.S. officials are likely to walk into Monday's meeting eager to portray news of Putin's openness to a U.S.-backed security agreement as a win for the Ukrainian side. But there's a sense that a major gulf still exists between what Putin and Ukraine's government are willing to accept, and that little progress was made towards bridging it largely as a result of Trump's hesitance to use any kind of leverage against Putin. Even that development may be met with skepticism. It's no secret to European leaders that support among Republicans and even progressives for direct U.S. military intervention in Ukraine is strikingly low. On Saturday, Zelensky himself responded to the news, writing in a post to Twitter/X: 'Security must be guaranteed reliably and in the long term, with the involvement of both Europe and the U.S.' The inclusion of the word 'reliably' suggests that Zelensky won't accept anything short of a concrete regional security agreement in exchange for dropping Ukraine's ambitions of joining the Nato alliance, which would grant Article 5 protections. Under Article 5 of the Nato charter, member-states must come to the aid of any member-state that is attacked individually. The provision has been activated only once, after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. 'All issues important to Ukraine must be discussed with Ukraine's participation, and no issue, particularly territorial ones, can be decided without Ukraine,' Zelensky added. Some had been optimistic that the use of leverage was imminent after Trump's statements ahead of the summit indicated that he no longer believed Putin's claims of wanting an end to the conflict. In social media posts and public statements, the U.S. president appeared to be moving closer to levying sanctions against the Russian government. European leaders hoped they were successful in driving that point home, in talks with Trump ahead of the Anchorage summit, but that progress seems to have evaporated. It may fall on Starmer and others like Stubb, who is known as a 'Trump whisperer', to re-convince the president that Putin's demand for a full seizure of the Donbas region is a poison pill aimed at driving Ukraine away from the table. On Sunday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio denied that Trump's position on whether Putin was serious had changed 'at all', potentially giving the delegation a reason to hope that the U.S. president could be made to understand that Ukraine wouldn't consider ceding further territorial gains to Russia. "I don't think his mind has changed at all. I think ultimately, if this whole effort doesn't work out, then there is going to have to be additional consequences to Russia. But we're trying to avoid that by reaching a peace agreement," Rubio said.
The Independent
31 minutes ago
- The Independent
Marco Rubio confronted by news anchor over past opposition to ‘deal' with Putin
Marco Rubio watched along Sunday as a news anchor played him back his own remarks opposing the idea of striking a 'deal' with Vladimir Putin. The moment occurred after the secretary of state returned to Washington this weekend from Alaska, where he had been part of the delegation to accompany President Donald Trump to a historic summit with the Russian leader. Trump met with Putin for nearly three hours Friday at a U.S. military base in Anchorage. In their first meeting in six years, the two leaders discussed the war in Ukraine. The U.S. president pushed for peace in the region but no ceasefire deal came out of the talks. However on Sunday, U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff revealed that Putin had agreed to allow the U.S. and its European allies to offer Ukraine a security guarantee. On Sunday, NBC's Kristen Welker confronted Rubio with video when he was a senator, shortly after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. In it, he proclaims that western leaders were repeatedly bamboozled by Putin due to the mistaken belief that it was possible the Russian leader would ever keep his word, and had a desire to broker peace agreements and avoid conflict. 'This guy lies. Habitually lies. He's never kept a deal he ever signed, and he lies all the time. And I don't know why--but he plays us like a violin in the west, because we want to cut a deal with everybody,' Senator Rubio said in the clip from three years ago. 'You can't cut a deal with a guy like this. He's a professional, experienced liar.' Welker then asked Rubio: 'Mr. Secretary, given that, what makes you think that if you are able to reach a deal with President Putin, that he would stick to it. Based on what you said, he is a liar.' Rubio replied that Putin's dishonesty was what made a U.S.-backed security agreement for Ukraine so important. Putin's openness to Ukraine inking a Nato-like security guarantee with American or European forces as part of a broader peace agreement, was described as a 'game-changer'by Witkoff. 'That's the point. That's why the deal has to have enforceable mechanisms in it,' Rubio said. 'That's why the deal has to have things like security guarantees.' Trump, however, has not committed publicly to honoring any kind of U.S.-backed security agreement for Ukraine, and often contradicts his own advisers. Trump is set to meet Monday with Zelensky, several European leaders and NATO's secretary-general. In Alaska, Trump and Putin also reportedly agreed that the U.S. would consider backing a Russian proposal that the cession of the Donbas region, including parts occupied by Ukraine, would be part of an agreement for the war to end. Rubio's explanation on Putin is just the latest sign of how the former senator has been put in awkward positions by his new Cabinet role. While in Congress, Senator Rubio was one of the strongest bipartisan voices to address broad reform of the U.S. immigration system, though it ultimately failed. He was also an outspoken opponent of tariffs and after January 6, Rubio was one of many Republicans who denounced Trump, and his supporters who attacked the Capitol. At the time he argued that the attack would damage America's image on the world stage, something he was separately confronted about on ABC News in January. His boss would go on to pardon hundreds of people involved in the attack, including some convicted of assaulting police.
