Israeli military reports making 'extensive' strikes on Hamas targets in Gaza
The Israeli military said it was "conducting extensive strikes" on Hamas targets in Gaza while medics there reported at least 30 people were killed in a series of the most violent air attacks since a ceasefire began on Jan. 19.
A senior Hamas official accused Israel of unilaterally overturning the ceasefire agreement.
The Israeli army did not provide more details about the strikes but Isareli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office released a statement saying the military had been instructed to "take strong action against the Hamas terrorist organization."
"This follows Hamas's repeated refusal to release our hostages, as well as its rejection of all of the proposals it has received from U.S. Presidential Envoy Steve Witkoff and from the mediators," the statement added.
"Israel will, from now on, act against Hamas with increasing military strength."
Three houses were hit in Deir Al-Balah in central Gaza, a building in Gaza City, and targets in Khan Younis and Rafah, according to medics and witnesses.
The Palestinian civil emergency service said there were at least 35 airstrikes on Gaza.
The escalating violence comes amid disagreement between Israel and Hamas on how to sustain the three-phase ceasefire that began in January.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
4 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
As Trump floats regime change in Iran, past US attempts to remake the Middle East may offer warnings
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — As President Donald Trump floats the idea of 'regime change' in Tehran, previous U.S. attempts to remake the Middle East by force over the decades offer stark warnings about the possibility of a deepening involvement in the Iran-Israeli conflict. 'If the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change???' Trump posted on his social media site over the weekend. The came after the U.S. bombed Iran's nuclear sites but before that country retaliated by firing its own missiles at a U.S. base in Qatar. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on Monday insisted that Trump, who spent years railing against 'forever wars' and pushing an 'America first' world view, had not committed a political about-face. 'The president's posture and our military posture has not changed,' she said, suggesting that a more aggressive approach might be necessary if Iran 'refuses to give up their nuclear program or engage in talks.' Leavitt also suggested that a new government in Iran could come about after its people stage a revolt — not necessarily requiring direct U.S. intervention. 'If they refuse to engage in diplomacy moving forward, why shouldn't the Iranian people rise up,' she asked. That's a perilous path that other U.S. administrations have taken. And it's a long way from Trump's past dismissal of ' stupid, endless wars,' and his scoffing at the idea of nation-building championed by his Republican predecessors — including in Afghanistan and Iraq, where the U.S. helped overthrow governments. Some lessons learned from previous conflicts: Initial success is often fleeting U.S. special forces and Afghan allies drove the Taliban from power and chased Osama bin Laden into Pakistan within months of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. American tanks rolled into Baghdad weeks after the 2003 invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein in Iraq. But then, both wars went on for years. The Taliban waged a tenacious, two-decade insurgency and swept back into power as the U.S. beat a chaotic retreat in 2021. The overthrow of Saddam plunged Iraq into chaos, with Sunni insurgents and Shiite militias battling each other and U.S. forces. Israel has so far largely succeeded in taking out Iran's air defenses and ballistic missiles and the U.S. strikes on three sites with missiles and 30,000-pound (13,600-kilogram) bunker-buster bombs has wrecked its nuclear program, Trump says. But that still potentially leaves hundreds of thousands in the military, the Revolutionary Guard and forces known as the Basij, who played a key role in quashing waves of anti-government protests in recent years. Ground forces are key — but don't guarantee success Airstrikes have never been enough on their own. Take, for example, Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi. His forces withstood a seven-month NATO air campaign in 2011 before rebels fighting city by city eventually cornered and killed him. There are currently no insurgent groups in Iran capable of taking on the Revolutionary Guard, and it's hard to imagine Israeli or U.S. forces launching a ground invasion of a mountainous country of some 80 million people that is about four times as big as Iraq. A split in Iran's own security forces would furnish a ready-made insurgency, but it would also likely tip the country into civil war. There's also the question of how ordinary Iranians would respond. Protests in recent years show that many Iranians believe their government is corrupt and repressive, and would welcome its demise. But the last time a foreign power attacked Iran — the Iraqi invasion of 1980 — people rallied around the flag. At the moment, many appear to be lying low or leaving the capital. Be wary of exiled opposition groups Some of the biggest cheerleaders for the U.S. invasion of Iraq were exiled opposition figures, many of whom had left the country decades before. When they returned, essentially on the back of U.S. tanks, they were marginalized by local armed groups more loyal to Iran. There are several large Iranian opposition groups based abroad. But they are not united and it's unclear how much support any of them has inside the country. The closest thing to a unifying opposition figure is Reza Pahlavi, the son of the shah who was overthrown in the 1979 Islamic Revolution that brought the theocracy to power. But many Iranians have bitter memories of repression under the shah, and others might reject Pahlavi over his outreach to Israel, especially if he tries to ride to power on the back of a foreign invasion. Chaos is practically guaranteed In Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya — and in Syria and Yemen after their 2011 uprisings — a familiar pattern emerged when governments were overthrown or seriously weakened. Armed groups emerged with competing agendas. Neighboring countries backed local proxies. Weapons flowed in and large numbers of civilians fled. The fighting in some places boiled over into full-blown civil war, and ever more violent extremist groups sprouted from the chaos. When it was all over, Saddam had been replaced by a corrupt and often dysfunctional government at least as friendly to Iran as it was to the United States. Gadhafi was replaced by myriad militias, many allied with foreign powers. The Taliban were replaced by the Taliban. ___ Weissert reported from Washington.
4 hours ago
Iran launches attacks on U.S. bases in Qatar and Iraq, officials say
Iran launched missile attacks Monday on U.S. military bases in Qatar and Iraq, retaliating for the American bombing of its nuclear sites and escalating tensions in the volatile region. An announcement on Iranian state television on Monday called the attack on Qatar's Al Udeid Air Base a mighty and successful response to America's aggression, as martial music played. Qatari officials said its air defences intercepted the attack. Iran also targeted the Ain al-Assad base housing U.S. troops in western Iraq, an Iraqi security official told The Associated Press. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly. U.S. President Donald Trump thrust the United States into the war between Iran and Israel with an unprecedented stealth-bomber strike on three Iranian nuclear sites this weekend. Just before the explosions, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian wrote on the social platform X: We neither initiated the war nor seeking it. But we will not leave invasion to the great Iran without answer. WATCH | The significance of the U.S. attack on Iran's nuclear sites: Début du widget Widget. Passer le widget ? Fin du widget Widget. Retourner au début du widget ? U.S. airstrikes in Iran: Key takeaways and potential consequences The National's Ian Hanomansing asks Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy founding director Janice Stein to break down the significance of the U.S. attack on Iran's nuclear sites, how Tehran may retaliate, and whether it could spark a wider conflict. In the past, Iran has threatened American forces at Al Udeid Air Base, which hosts the forward headquarters of the U.S. military's Central Command. Qatar, across the Persian Gulf from Iran, maintains diplomatic relations with Iran and shares a massive offshore natural gas field with Tehran. Israel, Iran trade strikes Earlier in the day, Israel expanded its war against Iran to include targets associated with the country's struggling theocracy, striking the gate of a Tehran prison notorious for holding political activists and hitting the headquarters of the military force that suppressed recent protests. As plumes of thick smoke rose over Tehran, Israel was attacked with yet another barrage of Iranian missiles and drones. The persistent fire has become a reality for civilians in both countries since Israel started the war to target Tehran's nuclear program. On the 11th day of the conflict, Israel said it attacked regime targets and government repression bodies in the heart of Tehran, but Israeli officials insisted they did not seek the overthrow of Iran's government, their archenemy since the country's 1979 Islamic Revolution. The Israeli military warned Iranians that it would continue to attack military sites around Tehran over the coming days as its focus has shifted to symbolic targets as well. The military issued the warning on X, though Iranians are struggling to access the outside world as an internet shutdown has crippled the country. The latest strikes unfolded only hours after President Donald Trump openly raised the possibility himself of regime change. If the current Iranian Regime is unable to MAKE IRAN GREAT AGAIN, why wouldn't there be a Regime change??? he asked on his Truth Social website. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later described Trump as simply raising a question. However, suggestions of overthrowing the Iranian government drew new anger from Tehran, which insists it will not negotiate at this time and is threatening to retaliate directly against either American troops or interests in a Mideast already inflamed by the still-raging Israel-Hamas war in the Gaza Strip. Are you a Canadian currently in the Middle East? We want to hear from you. Send an email to ask@ The Associated Press with files from CBC News and Reuters
Vancouver Sun
4 hours ago
- Vancouver Sun
What is the Strait of Hormuz, and what would it mean for Iran to close it?
Among the many concerns surrounding the ongoing conflict involving Israel, Iran and the United States is the state of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping lane for much of the world's oil and natural gas. Here's what to know. The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow channel of water that connects the Persian Gulf with the Arabian Sea (and beyond that the Indian Ocean). It is bounded on one side by Iran, and on the other by Oman and the United Arab Emirates. About 167 kilometres long, it is only about 50 kilometres wide at its entrance and exit, and just 33 kilometres across at its narrowest point. Since territorial waters typically extend 22 kilometres from the mainland, this puts part of the strait in both Iranian and Omanian waters. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. According to CBS News , more than a quarter of all oil shipped by sea in 2024 and the first quarter of 2025 travelled through the Strait of Hormuz. This amounted to about one-fifth of all oil and petroleum consumption worldwide. The strait also accounted for about one-fifth of the world's liquefied natural gas (LNG) trade last year. Close to 40 per cent of the oil that has passed through the strait daily came from Saudi Arabia — the most of any country — while most of the LNG was from Qatar. Other oil-producing nations that use the strait include Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the UAE. A report by Britain's Guardian newspaper notes that the most likely disruption would be in the form of mines laid in the shipping channel and primed to explode or launch a rocket from the seabed if they detect passing traffic. However, it notes that laying the mines would be a dangerous job, since any attempt to do so would likely come under attack from American and/or Israeli forces. Sir Alex Younger, former head of the U.K.'s intelligence agency MI6, told the BBC that a blockade of the strait by Iranian ships was another possibility, adding: 'Closing the strait would be obviously an incredible economic problem given the effect it would have on the oil price.' It's worth noting that Iran has repeatedly threatened over the years to close the Strait of Hormuz, but has never actually done so. The nearest it came was in the late 1980s, when so so-called 'tanker war' saw attacks on Kuwaiti and other oil tankers. This led to U.S. warships escorting tankers through the region for a while. Opher Baron , a distinguished professor of operations management at the Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto, said that closing the strait could harm Iran's economy as well as others. 'There are ways to let your ships go through when you close it but it's complicated,' he said. On the other hand, he noted that Iran 'has its back to wall, more than past events. They may now take steps that they didn't take in the past.' Others are less concerned. An analysis by Reuters noted that, since the 1980s, several overland pipelines have come online in the region leading to the Red Sea port city of Yanbu, Saudi Arabia, and the Fujairah oil terminal in the UAE, which is just outside the Strait of Hormuz. Oil prices are already up over the uncertainty caused by the U.S. attack on Iran . Baron said the longer the conflict continues, the higher prices will go, and that a blockade of the strait could cause an even sharper spike. 'The uncertainly that it adds … is going to create some increases in price, and I think this will stay for quite a while,' he said. Gas prices have already risen in the past week, in part due to the threats in the region. 'A step like this is escalating things rather than de-escalating it,' he said. 'So I'm afraid it's going to have a longer impact, and we could see gas prices 20, 30 per cent that what they were a couple of weeks ago.' Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our newsletters here .
