Iran Demands Emergency United Nations Action Amid ‘Criminal Aggression’ by US, Israel
February 28, 2026 By Jake Johnson for Common Dreams, https://scheerpost.com/2026/02/28/iran-demands-emergency-united-nations-action-amid-criminal-aggression-by-us-israel/
As US and Israeli bombs fell on Tehran, the Iranian Foreign Ministry on Saturday vowed that the country would defend itself against “criminal aggression” and implored the United Nations Security Council to take emergency action.
The ministry said in a lengthy statement that Saturday’s attacks, which US President Donald Trump characterized as the start of a massive military operation aimed at overthrowing the Iranian government, represent “a violation of Article 2, Paragraph 4, of the United Nations Charter and a clear armed aggression against the Islamic Republic of Iran.”
“The Islamic Republic of Iran notes the grave duty of the United Nations and its Security Council to take immediate action to confront the violation of international peace and security,” reads the ministry’s statement, which noted that the US and Israeli assault began “in the midst of a diplomatic process.”
“The Iranian people are now proud that they did everything they could to prevent war,” the statement continues. “Now is the time to defend the homeland and confront the enemy’s military aggression. Just as we were ready for negotiations, we are more ready than ever for defense. The armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran will respond to the aggressors with authority.”
Ben Saul, the UN special rapporteur on human rights and counterterrorism, condemned US-Israeli “aggression against Iran” in a social media post, calling the assault a “violation of the most fundamental rule of international law—the ban on the use of force.”
“All responsible governments should condemn this lawlessness from two countries who excel in shredding the international order,” Saul added.
UN nuclear watchdog says it’s unable to verify whether Iran has suspended all uranium enrichment
By STEPHANIE LIECHTENSTEIN, AP News, February 28, 2026
VIENNA (AP) — Iran has not allowed the United Nations nuclear agency access to its nuclear facilities bombed by Israel and the United States during a 12-day war in June, according to a confidential report by the watchdog circulated to member states and seen Friday by The Associated Press.
The report from the International Atomic Energy Agency stressed that it “cannot verify whether Iran has suspended all enrichment-related activities,” or the “size of Iran’s uranium stockpile at the affected nuclear facilities.”
Iran has four declared enrichment facilities, but the report warned that because of the lack of access, the IAEA “cannot provide any information on the current size, composition or whereabouts of the stockpile of enriched uranium in Iran.”
The report stressed that the “loss of continuity of knowledge … needs to be addressed with the utmost urgency.”
Iran has long insisted its program is peaceful, but the IAEA and Western nations say Tehran had an organized nuclear weapons program up until 2003. The U.S. is seeking a deal to limit Iran’s nuclear program and ensure it does not develop nuclear weapons.
Highly enriched material should be verified regularly
The IAEA reported that Iran had informed the agency in a letter dated Feb. 2 that normal safeguards were “legally untenable and materially impracticable,” as a result of threats and ”acts of aggression.”
The confidential report also said Friday that Iran did provide access to IAEA inspectors “to each of the unaffected nuclear facilities at least once” since June 2025, with the exception of a power plant at Karun that is under construction.
Iran is legally obliged to cooperate with the IAEA under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, but suspended all cooperation after the war with Israel……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
IAEA joined Geneva talks
The IAEA reported on Friday that Grossi attended negotiations between the U.S. and Iran on Feb. 17 and Feb. 26 in Geneva at which he “provided advice” on the verification of Iran’s nuclear program. The report said that those negotiations are “ongoing.”
Thursday’s talks, the third round this year under Omani mediation, ended without a deal, leaving the danger of another Mideast war on the table as the U.S. has gathered a massive fleet of aircraft and warships in the region.
An Omani official said lower-level technical talks would continue next week in Vienna, the home of the IAEA. The agency is likely to be critical in any deal.
Iran says it is not pursuing weapons and has so far resisted demands that it halt uranium enrichment on its soil or hand over its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.
Similar talks last year between the U.S. and Iran about Iran’s nuclear program broke down after the start of the war in June. Before then, Iran had been enriching uranium up to 60% purity. https://apnews.com/article/iran-nuclear-iaea-uranium-enrichment-suspend-ccf574a324504b985f4b158f9d3d6941
Exiled Iranian Denounces War: ‘The People Will Suffer, Not Gain!’
by ScheerPost Staff, 28 Feb 26, https://scheerpost.com/2026/02/28/exiled-iranian-denounces-war-the-people-will-suffer-not-gain/
Behrouz Farahani, a political analyst and opponent of the Islamic Republic living in exile, condemned the US and Israeli military attack on Iran. Speaking to Middle East Eye about how Iranian opposition figures who also oppose the war are responding, he said:
“In this situation, we oppose both sides. This war is between an international imperialist power, the US, and its regional ally, Israel, on one side, and the reactionary regime of Iran on the other. We are against both sides and against this war.”
He added that opponents of the Islamic Republic who reject foreign intervention are mobilizing:
“We are calling for an immediate ceasefire and are organising anti‑war protests. This war will bring nothing but misery to the Iranian people. As we have seen before, its only result will be more pressure on ordinary people. This war will not help the Iranian people in their struggle against the Islamic Republic. Especially when one side is Israel and the other side is Trump.”
“When we have a president like Trump, who has openly said that his main concern is money, it is clear that this attack has nothing to do with improving life in Iran or helping its people,” Farahani said. “One of the main reasons for this war is that the Islamic Republic does not serve America’s economic interests in the region or globally.”
He stressed that this critique does not imply any support for Tehran:
“This does not mean that because the Islamic Republic is in conflict with American interests, it is a progressive or anti‑imperialist force. Not at all. Just as the Taliban in Afghanistan was a deeply reactionary force despite being in conflict with the United States, the Islamic Republic is also a reactionary force that has now been attacked by international imperialism and its regional ally.”
Farahani’s comments underscore what many critics argue is the real motive behind the escalation: a broad, opportunistic effort by the United States and Israel to secure regional dominance, energy access, and geopolitical leverage under the guise of confronting Iran.
Trump Advisers Wanted Israel To ‘Attack Iran First’ For Better Optics: Politico
by Tyler Durden, Friday, Feb 27, 2026 , https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/trump-advisers-want-israel-attack-iran-first-better-optics-politico
Politico is out with a crazy story on Thursday, but which will make sense to those following the trajectory of US foreign policy over the past couple decades plus.
Senior US officials want Israel to strike Iran before Washington launches a renewed assault in order to build domestic backing for war. Advisers to President Donald Trump are “privately arguing that an Israeli attack would trigger Iran to retaliate, helping muster support from American voters for a U.S. strike,” the outlet writes, citing two people familiar with the discussions.
“The calculus is a political one – that more Americans would stomach a war with Iran if the United States or an ally were attacked first,” Politico continues.
The subtext here is that American troops would likely come under retaliation in whatever form such a serious escalation takes. Currently the US is drawing down troops from bases immediately in harm’s way, including reportedly in Qatar and Bahrain.
“There’s thinking in and around the administration that the politics are a lot better if the Israelis go first and alone and the Iranians retaliate against us, and give us more reason to take action,” one person familiar with the discussions said.
The mood in Washington is said to be that nuclear negotiations with Iran appear increasingly unlikely to succeed – despite some ‘positive’ headlines out of Geneva – and that “the primary question is becoming when and how the US attacks.”
The Politico report suggests Tucker Carlson has assessed it exactly right when days ago he complained, “What I really object to, what makes me mad, is when American leaders, whose job it is to represent Americans, are more loyal to a foreign country than they are to their own.”
Indeed the outlet goes so far as to emphasize that “There’s a high likelihood of American casualties. And that comes with lots of political risk” – according to the words of one of the officials interviewed for the story.
Once again the decision-makers are on the brink of throwing American troops under the bus for the sake of another bloody regime change war. They might heed the words of one soldier who over a decade ago expressed that the troops themselves are sick of the pointless ‘forever wars’..
Trump himself of course campaigned on starting no new wars, especially in the Middle East. Ironically he’s been bragging about ending seven conflicts globally, while standing on the brink of provoking and ordering a new large-scale war breaking out across the whole Mideast region.
A War With Iran Would Not Be a One-Off Event But a Disastrous Ongoing Rupture
Both U.S. officials and international partners have voiced concern over the likelihood of a war with Iran. The United Kingdom has reportedly said that the United States would not be allowed to use British airbases, including Diego Garcia and Royal Air Force Fairford, for strikes against Iran, citing concerns that such action would violate international law.
The 1973 War Powers Act grants Congress the authority to check President Trump’s ability and power to enter an armed conflict without legislative approval.
If Congress cedes its power to stop a war with Iran, it will fully erode any lingering promise of democratic restraint.
By Hanieh Jodat , Truthout, February 24, 2026
As the U.S. slowly continues its brokered negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program and ballistic missiles, it is also expanding its military posture across the Middle East — amounting to the biggest military buildup in the region since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Indirect talks between Iran and the U.S. took place in Geneva on February 17 with little progress and plenty of details left to discuss. According to U.S. officials, the Islamic Republic offered to come back within two weeks with a proposal which addresses some core issues and gaps in the positions by both parties. Meanwhile, Donald Trump’s actions play a different tune. On February 19, Trump announced he would give Iran 10 to 15 days to reach a deal, otherwise the U.S. claims to be fully prepared to take military action, the consequences of which could lead to a regional catastrophe. The next talks are set to take place on February 26.
Ahead of those talks, Donald Trump has deployed the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world’s largest aircraft carrier, which is set to join the Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group in the Arabian Sea. The United States has also significantly increased air power in the Middle East; according to open-source intelligence analysts and flight-tracking data, over 120 U.S. aircraft have deployed to the region. With each warship it repositions, each military personnel it places on alert, and all of the air power it has amassed in the region, the U.S. sends a message that diplomacy may no longer be on the table.
Both U.S. officials and international partners have voiced concern over the likelihood of a war with Iran. The United Kingdom has reportedly said that the United States would not be allowed to use British airbases, including Diego Garcia and Royal Air Force Fairford, for strikes against Iran, citing concerns that such action would violate international law.
Meanwhile, in Congress, Kentucky Republican Thomas Massie and California Democrat Ro Khanna have joined forces again to push a war powers resolution. The 1973 War Powers Act grants Congress the authority to check President Trump’s ability and power to enter an armed conflict without legislative approval……………………………………………………………………………………………..
A war with Iran will not stop at its borders and will not remain where it is aimed. Such impulsive and reckless military actions never do. The Middle East is an ecosystem of lives, alliances, and fragile balances that will draw in neighboring countries and global powers.
And while the momentum towards a war with Iran accelerates, we must be reminded of the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan in 2001, which accomplished little outside the brutalization of one of the most economically starved countries on earth. Similarly, we must remember the collapse of Iraq’s infrastructure and civil society alongside the imposition of a farcical democracy after the 2003 invasion — a collapse that was fueled in part by years of devastating sanctions that predated the invasion. …………………………………………………………………………………
Rather than a one-off strike or a clean operation, a war with Iran would almost certainly widen conflict in the region and produce consequences far beyond what could be intended or repaired.
This is why the War Powers Resolution exists, not as a symbolic gesture but as a bulwark to slow the rush towards catastrophe. The framers of the Constitution understood what modern politicians seem to ignore: that war is too consequential to be left in the hands of one person, one branch of the government, or an executive order. The power to start a war with another country was placed in the hands of Congress to ensure transparency, force dialogue, and demand accountability…………………………………………………………………………… https://truthout.org/articles/a-war-with-iran-would-not-be-a-one-off-event-but-a-disastrous-ongoing-rupture/?utm_source=Truthout&utm_campaign=3e2745821e-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2026_02_24_10_26&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_bbb541a1db-3e2745821e-650192793
Trump’s War of Choice: Oman Reveals Iran Agreement Was Imminent
February 28, 2026, by Joshua Scheer, https://scheerpost.com/2026/02/28/trumps-war-of-choice-oman-reveals-iran-agreement-was-imminent/
Hours before U.S. bombs began falling on Iran, a quiet but extraordinary diplomatic revelation aired on American television.
On CBS’s Face the Nation, Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi—the chief mediator between Washington and Tehran—stated plainly that a nuclear agreement between the United States and Iran was “within our reach.”
It was not vague optimism. It was a detailed outline of concessions.
According to Albusaidi, Iran had agreed to something that went beyond the 2015 nuclear accord negotiated under Barack Obama—a deal later abandoned by Donald Trump. This time, Tehran had committed not merely to limits on enrichment, but to zero stockpiling of enriched nuclear material. No accumulation. No reserve. Full and comprehensive verification by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
“If you cannot stockpile material that is enriched,” Albusaidi explained, “then there is no way you can actually create a bomb.”
In other words: the central justification for war was being diplomatically neutralized.
And yet, within hours, Trump announced military strikes on Iran and signaled a campaign aimed not at containment, but regime change.
The Timing Speaks Volumes
Oman has long served as a discreet intermediary in U.S.–Iran diplomacy. It is known for caution, not grandstanding. For Albusaidi to go public—on a flagship American news program—was highly unusual.
According to Trita Parsi of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, the move was unprecedented. Oman’s message was clear: diplomacy had produced real progress. Trump could have declared victory.
Instead, he declared war.
If Albusaidi’s account is accurate, then the administration’s claim that Iran “rejected every opportunity” to curb nuclear ambitions collapses under scrutiny. What was preempted was not an imminent nuclear breakout—it was a diplomatic breakthrough.
War of Choice, Not Necessity
The United States Constitution vests the power to declare war in Congress. No such declaration has been issued. International law permits force only in response to an armed attack or with authorization from the United Nations Security Council. Neither condition appears to have been met.
This is not a defensive war. It is a war of choice.
And it is a deeply unpopular one. A recent survey found that only 21% of Americans support initiating an attack on Iran under current circumstances. The public understands something Washington elites often ignore: wars in the Middle East do not remain limited, surgical, or contained. They metastasize.
The echoes of 2003 are unmistakable.
Diplomacy Sabotaged
The tragedy is not only that bombs are falling. It is that negotiations were ongoing. Additional talks were scheduled for next week. The diplomatic channel was open.
By launching strikes at the moment mediation was yielding results, the administration has sent a stark message—not just to Iran, but to the world: agreements reached through dialogue can be nullified by executive fiat.
This damages more than a single negotiation. It undermines the credibility of American diplomacy itself.
If zero stockpiling under full IAEA verification was indeed on the table, then the choice before Washington was clear: accept an enforceable nonproliferation framework—or escalate toward regional war.
The administration chose escalation.
The Broader Implication
Regime-change wars have a long and destructive history in U.S. foreign policy. They rarely produce democracy. They often produce chaos, extremism, and prolonged suffering—for civilians first and foremost.
The question now is not simply whether this war is legal or justified. It is whether it was avoidable.
The Omani foreign minister’s televised appeal suggests that it was.
Peace, he said, was within reach.
And then the bombs began.
Trump Says ‘Heavy and Pinpoint Bombing’ of Iran Will Continue “As Long As Necessary”
February 28, 2026, Scheerpost Staff, https://scheerpost.com/2026/02/28/trump-says-heavy-and-pinpoint-bombing-of-iran-will-continue-as-long-as-necessary/
In rapidly escalating developments reported by Al Jazeera English, US President Donald Trump declared that US bombing operations inside Iran will continue “uninterrupted throughout the week or, as long as necessary.”
The comments came amid conflicting claims over the fate of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Israeli officials and Trump have alleged that Khamenei was killed in the joint US-Israeli assault, while Iranian authorities have strongly denied the claim, with semi-official media insisting he remains “steadfast” and directing operations.
According to Al Jazeera’s live coverage, Trump wrote on Truth Social that Iran had been “very much destroyed and even, obliterated” in a single day of strikes. He further called on Iran’s Revolutionary Guard (IRGC) and national police forces to join what he described as “Iranian patriots” seeking regime change, suggesting “that process should soon be starting.”
“The heavy and pinpoint bombing,” Trump added, “will continue… as long as necessary to achieve our objective of PEACE THROUGHOUT THE MIDDLE EAST AND, INDEED, THE WORLD!”
Regional Fallout
Al Jazeera reported missile strikes in Tel Aviv following Iranian retaliation, as well as debris falling across Jordan from intercepted projectiles. In the United Arab Emirates, officials confirmed an “incident” at Zayed International Airport resulting in one fatality and multiple injuries, while a drone interception reportedly caused a limited fire at the Burj Al Arab hotel in Dubai.
At the United Nations Security Council, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned that the strikes by the US and Israel, along with Iran’s response, pose a “grave threat to international peace and security,” cautioning that military escalation risks igniting uncontrollable consequences in an already volatile region.
Iran’s UN ambassador, Amir-Saeid Iravani, said Tehran considers “all bases, facilities and assets” of US and Israeli forces in the region to be legitimate military targets under its right of self-defense. Meanwhile, Israel’s UN ambassador, Danny Danon, defended the joint operation as a necessary response to what he described as an existential threat.
Escalation and Uncertainty
Trump also told ABC News he has a “very good idea” of who should lead Iran if the current government falls — reinforcing suggestions that regime change may be an underlying objective of the operation.
The US military’s Central Command said there were no reported US casualties and that naval assets remain fully operational.
As Al Jazeera’s live blog continues to update, the situation remains fluid, with conflicting claims, mounting civilian impacts, and warnings from international officials that the widening conflict could destabilize the broader Middle East.
For live updates from Al Jazeera English here
US and Israeli attack on Iran: At least 51 girls reported killed in strike on school
February 28, 2026 , by Joshua Scheer, https://scheerpost.com/2026/02/28/us-and-israeli-attack-on-iran-at-least-51-girls-reported-killed-in-strike-on-school/
In the latest escalation of the U.S.–Israel assault on Iran, at least 51 young girls were reportedly killed when an airstrike struck a primary school in the southern city of Minab. According to Iranian state media, the victims — between the ages of seven and twelve — were inside Shajareh Tayyebeh elementary school when the building was hit in broad daylight.
Footage circulating online appears to show civilians digging through the rubble as smoke rises over the surrounding neighborhood.
Washington says the strikes are aimed at “eliminating imminent threats.” Tehran calls it a massacre.
The truth — and the consequences — demand scrutiny.
Here is breakthrough news on the ground
In moments like this, journalism is not a matter of slogans — it is a matter of moral clarity.
If the reports from Minab are confirmed, the bombing of an elementary school filled with young girls is not a “strike on imminent threats.” It is the annihilation of children. It is the kind of act that shatters whatever remains of the language of precision warfare and exposes the brutality beneath it.
The United States and Israel insist they are acting defensively. Tehran calls it a massacre. The world is left with rubble, grieving families, and the now-familiar choreography of denial, justification and geopolitical spin.
But certain facts demand scrutiny regardless of allegiance: Why were negotiations underway if war was already being prepared? What intelligence justified striking a civilian school in broad daylight? Who will independently verify the casualty count? And most importantly — who will be held accountable if the worst fears are confirmed?
The pattern is not new. From the siege of Gaza to suffocating sanctions regimes, from covert operations to open bombardment, the language of “security” has too often masked policies that devastate civilian life. The human cost is absorbed by those with the least power: children in classrooms, families in apartment blocks, workers in cities far from decision-making centers.
We should resist both reflexive propaganda and reflexive dismissal. Iranian state media must be scrutinized. Pentagon briefings must be scrutinized. Viral footage must be verified. But skepticism cannot become moral paralysis. If dozens of schoolgirls have been killed, that reality outweighs every talking point.
Escalation with Iran is not a contained regional maneuver. It risks a wider war, global economic shock, environmental catastrophe, and a further erosion of international law. Once normalized, the bombing of civilian infrastructure becomes precedent.
The responsibility of independent media is not to amplify rage, but to insist on evidence, accountability, and humanity. If civilians are being killed in the name of “security,” the public deserves answers that go far beyond press releases.
The truth — and the consequences — demand scrutiny.
This tweet bears repeating again and again:
“Bombing Iran in the middle of negotiations, while starving Cuba, while genociding Palestinians, while threatening to invade Greenland… the U.S. and Israel are the single greatest threat to humanity — and it’s not even close. We are all forced to live in the nightmare they create.” https://x.com/jasonhickel
‘Bombs Will Be Dropping Everywhere’: Trump Launches Illegal Regime Change War Against Iran
February 28, 2026, By Jake Johnson for Common Dreams, https://scheerpost.com/2026/02/28/bombs-will-be-dropping-everywhere-trump-launches-illegal-regime-change-war-against-iran/
President Donald Trump announced in the early hours of Saturday morning that the US has launched a massive military operation aimed at toppling the Iranian government as blasts were reported in Tehran, including near the offices of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Israel, under the leadership of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is taking part in the assault. Unnamed Israeli security sources told Channel 12 that Israel and the Trump administration are “going all in” against Iran as Trump instructed Iranians to “stay sheltered,” warning that “bombs will be dropping everywhere.” People were seen seeking cover in Tehran as the US and Israeli bombs began to fall.
The assault, dubbed “Operation Epic Fury” by the Pentagon, comes days after the US and Iran took part in talks in Geneva, which Trump’s envoys characterized as “positive.” In announcing military action on Saturday, Trump said falsely that the Iranian government has “rejected every opportunity to renounce their nuclear ambitions.”
The US and Israeli attacks—which both nations characterized as “preemptive”—are plainly illegal under international law, which prohibits the threat or use of force except in response to an armed attack. The Trump administration is also violating US law, which gives Congress the sole power to declare war.
“The term ‘preemptive’ is pure propaganda,” wrote Drop Site journalist Jeremy Scahill. “The US once again used the veneer of negotiations as a cover to bomb Iran. Tehran had just offered terms that went far beyond the 2015 nuclear deal. What was preempted was diplomacy. The same propaganda tactics used in the 2003 Iraq war.”
Trump, who ditched the 2015 nuclear deal during his first White House term, repeatedly made clear in his remarks Saturday that he does not intend the new assault on Iran to be limited in scope like his bombings of Iranian nuclear sites last year. In the weeks leading up to Saturday’s attack, the Trump administration carried out a massive military buildup in the Middle East even as the president publicly claimed he was open to a diplomatic resolution.
“We may have casualties,” the US president said of American troops. “That often happens in war. But we’re doing this not for now. We’re doing this for the future.”
Trump also urged the Iranian armed forces to surrender or “face certain death” as the US fired Tomahawk cruise missiles and other munitions at Iran.
The Iranian government’s immediate response to Saturday’s onslaught was a pledge of “crushing retaliation” and a wave of drone and missile attacks on Israel. The Associated Press reported that “hours after the strikes on Iran, explosions rocked northern Israel as the country worked to intercept incoming Iranian missiles.”
Iran’s foreign minister later informed his Iraqi counterpart that Iran would be targeting US military installations in the region in retaliation for Saturday’s attacks.
A spokesperson for the Iranian military declared that “we will teach Israel and America a lesson they have never experienced in their history.”
“Any base that helps America and Israel will be the target of the Iranian armed forces,” the official added.
Iran will not bow down to US pressure in nuclear talks, Pezeshkian says
Iranian president vows to stand firm as Trump threatens strikes and the US bolsters its military presence in the Gulf.
By Al Jazeera Staff and News Agencies, 22 Feb 2026
Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian has pledged not to fold to pressure from the United States after his American counterpart, Donald Trump, said he was considering limited strikes to force a deal on Tehran’s nuclear programme.
Pezeshkian’s comments on Saturday came amid high tensions in the Gulf, with the US continuing to grow its military presence with the deployment of two aircraft carriers and dozens of jets.
“We will not bow down in the face of any of these difficulties,” Pezeshkian said at a ceremony to honour members of the Iranian Paralympics team.
“World powers are lining up with cowardice to force us to bow our heads. Just as you did not bow down in the face of difficulties, we will not bow down in the face of these problems,” he said.
Iran and the US resumed indirect talks on Tehran’s nuclear programme in Oman earlier this month, and held a second round in Switzerland last week.
Although Washington and Tehran described the talks in overall positive terms, they failed to achieve a breakthrough.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on Friday that a diplomatic solution appeared within “our reach” and that his country was planning to finalise a draft deal in “the next two to three days” to send to Washington.
Crossroads
Al Jazeera’s Tohid Asadi, reporting from Tehran, said the two countries appear to be at a “crossroads once again” and that residents of the Iranian capital were watching closely for signs of diplomatic progress.
“How can anyone not worry about war?” one woman told Al Jazeera. “Even if we don’t worry about ourselves, we worry about our children’s future.”
A businessman said he believed military confrontation was eventually inevitable “because what the Americans want is surrender, and the Iranian state won’t accept that”………………………………………………………….
Trump issued new threats of military action in January following a deadly Iranian crackdown on antigovernment protesters. Tehran responded by threatening to strike US military bases in the region and warning that it could close the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway for oil exports for the Gulf Arab states.
Greatest air power since 2003
According to the US media, the airpower Washington is amassing in the region is the greatest since its invasion of Iraq in 2003. In the past few days, Washington has deployed more than 120 aircraft to the Middle East, while the world’s largest aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald R Ford, is on its way to join the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group already positioned in the Arabian Sea…………………………………………………………………. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/2/22/iran-will-not-bow-down-to-us-pressure-in-nuclear-talks-pezeshkian-says
Lies Of Omission As Fresh American War Crimes Loom
The US has been at war for 222 out of 239 years since 1776. The country is hardly going to stop now, especially not with the stars aligning for a project the US-Israel-Zionist axis has been desperate to undertake for nearly 50 years.
And despite the fact that a nation at almost constant war is going to attack a country that last initiated a war nearly 300 years ago, the US and Israel are going to pose as the saviours and pacifiers.
Do not panic, February 22, 2026 , Nate Bear
The US has amassed the largest military force in the Middle East since the invasion of Iraq almost 23 years ago and is poised once again to commit mass murder and gleefully perpetrate an astonishing amount of war crimes.
Yesterday a huge number of planes, from fighter jets to air-to-air refuelling tankers to command and control planes, left the US en route to the Middle East. The planes had stop-overs on US military bases in England and Germany, because no imperial war crime is ever complete without the involvement of Europe.
A US attack on Iran, a flagrant violation of international law, if such a thing is even worth mentioning any more, appears imminent.
Why? For Israel, for oil, for power projection, for Trump’s legacy. Because the logic of the military-industrial complex demands that $1 trillion dollars a year and an astonishing array of killing machinery doesn’t just sit idle.
Because this is what empires do.
Because the US is violence.
And there is no more stunning display of American violence than a big war.
The US has been at war for 222 out of 239 years since 1776. The country is hardly going to stop now, especially not with the stars aligning for a project the US-Israel-Zionist axis has been desperate to undertake for nearly 50 years.
And despite the fact that a nation at almost constant war is going to attack a country that last initiated a war nearly 300 years ago, the US and Israel are going to pose as the saviours and pacifiers.
The leaders of these countries will self-anoint themselves as such, while western media will subject their readers and viewers to a dizzying display of propaganda to enable the murders and wash the crimes.
The groundwork
But the propaganda won’t start from the day of the attack.
The truth is, we wouldn’t be in this situation without the groundwork laid by the media over the years.
We wouldn’t be on the verge of another major US war without the often subtle lies of omission that have characterised western reporting on Iran for decades, and have been especially evident in recent months.
Let’s go through some of them.
Shifting narratives
Firstly, and importantly, the premise for an attack.
Last June Trump said the US had ‘obliterated’ Iran’s nuclear sites.
But now, eight months later, the US apparently needs to do a much bigger war to take out Iran’s nuclear programme.
No one will ask the obvious question.
The premise, that Iran’s nuclear programme is a threat, will stand tall and uninterrogated in the mind of the propagandised western media consumer who just eight months ago was told it had all been destroyed.
Loaded terms
“Iran’s nuclear programme.”
The words themselves are loaded with an intent that is rarely examined or explained.
They never come with any context and are purposefully designed to shut down any critical thinking, as I’ve written about before.
Western media never explains that Iran is one of the world’s biggest producers of radiopharmaceuticals used for cancer diagnostics and treatments. And to diagnose cancer and make cancer drugs, you need medical isotopes. And you can’t make medical isotopes without enriching uranium. Iran is in the top five global exporters of radioactive drugs, supplying fifteen countries, including European countries, with nuclear medicines. And sanctions on Iran prohibit the import of radiopharmaceuticals.
So without its deliberately misrepresented “nuclear programme” Iran would find it hard, if not impossible, to diagnose and treat people with cancer and other illnesses.
The nuclear deal
Media never explains this and also never explains the background to US threats towards Iran over this programme. Amid all the coverage of talks and possible deals, Western media never mentions the fact that in 2018 Trump himself ripped up a deal, signed in 2016, that was working just fine.
That agreement, ratified by the UN Security Council, facilitated regular site inspections and allowed Iran to manufacture nuclear material for medicine and energy. The media will never remind us of this, nor that the last inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency reported Iran to be in full compliance with their obligations.
We are never told that Trump, under pressure from his Zionist backers to manufacture a crisis which could move the US and Israel towards war, and eager to undo a rare Obama success, deliberately created a problem to solve.
And as we’re about to find out, there was never any intention of solving it peacefully.
But media will keep up the pretence that these were good faith negotiations that broke down because of Iran’s demands. And they won’t tell us those demands included being able to diagnose and treat cancer.
Unilateralism
The fact of the US unilaterally withdrawing from the previous deal is also a key omission in the coverage……………………………………………………..
Israel’s nukes
Talking of rogue states, the media will never examine the foundational premise underlying the whole issue of Iranian nuclear capability.
They’ll never question why Israel is allowed to have a nuclear weapon but Iran isn’t. They’ll never lead readers or viewers to question why the region’s preeminent aggressor, a perpetrator of genocide and a constant violator of laws and norms, is the one trusted with the most destructive weapon in human history.
Because then they’d have to frame Israel as the aggressor.
Then they’d have to explain how empire works.
Then they’d have to examine glaring double standards and hypocrisies and introduce people to critical thinking which doesn’t lead to reflexive cheerleading for empire.
And that is a big no-no.
It is, after all, much easier to manufacture consent for war if a large chunk of the population thinks you’re the good guys doing freedom and peace things.
New pretexts
If you’ve been following the news, you might be aware that the latest talks go beyond the nuclear programme and introduce new pretexts for war, one of which is Iran’s ballistic missile programme.
Israel, having been shocked at Iran’s ability to strike its territory last June, wants the new deal to include the elimination of all Iran’s long-range missiles.
When the US and Israel attack, we’ll be told that it’s Iran’s fault. We’ll be told that wanting to retain defensive capability in the face of an expansionist, genocidal enemy loudly committed to your destruction is an irrational position.
The Guardian among others have already started pushing this line.
By contrast, we won’t be asked to think about why Israel can have any weapon it likes.
We won’t be asked to think about why the US would go to war to stop a country being able to defend itself from Israel.
This will just be presented as the natural order of things.
American violence
The coming war on Iran will be a completely illegal war of unprovoked aggression committed by the US against a country 4500 miles away which poses zero threat………………………………………………………………………………………………… https://www.donotpanic.news/p/lies-of-omission-as-fresh-american
Israel and American Hawks are pushing US to Iran War with Catastrophic Consequences.
Former U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Chas Freeman, observes in an on-line interview, that “to be hated means that one does hateful things” and Israel’s leaders are behaving badly”.He noted that what Netanyahu means by peace is pacification [of Arab nations]. It is delusional and [shows] a complete lack of understanding of one’s enemies”.
Hugh J. Curran, INFORMED COMMENT, 02/22/2026
Orono, Maine – It seems clear that Israeli proponents of conflict in the Middle East, as well as supporters in the US media and politics, are determined to take America to war with Iran. This observation was forcefully stated by the global affairs analyst, Patrick Henningsen, who has recently returned from Iran.
The causes of the protests have not so much to do with the regime itself but with economic conditions, including an inflation rate of 42% in December, 2025 while food prices rose by 72% and medical costs increased by 50%. The Iranian Rial has suffered sharp depreciation with poor fiscal policies and mismanagement being causes, although numerous sanctions have been taking a serious toll on Iran’s economy and its people.
Israel and the U.S. claim that Iran “poses an existential threat and therefore must give up its ballistic missile program, which is its primary deterrent”. In addition, Trump has renewed a claim that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon although they are not planning such a program according to Iran sources and U.S. intelligence assessments.
An additional justification for war is that thousands of protestors were injured or killed in recent demonstrations in Iran. Mai Sato, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Iran has cited “around 5000 deaths” while the “Human Rights Activists News Agency” states that there were 7,015 deaths. The Iran state media reports that 3117 died, including over 100 officers. Others report a “spiral of disinformation”, promoted by supporters of the former Shah’s son, Reza Pahlavi, who have grossly inflated the numbers.
Former CIA director, Mike Pompeo was quoted in the Jerusalem Post as saying that “every Mossad agent walks beside them [Iranian demonstrators] Mossad encouraged the anti-regime protestors: “Go out together into the streets. The time has come, “Mossad operatives are with the protestors “not only from a distance. We are with [them] in the field.”
Other extreme conservative views that have gained recent attention include those of Sen. Lindsey Graham: “The best answer to all the problems created by Iran is regime change ………………………
Israel’s Netanyahu has been, for some time, promoting conflict with Iran and is once again attempting to persuade American leaders to engage in an attack in order to bring about regime change in the Islamic Republic.
A writer for Israel’s Haaretz News has warned that the U.S. ”is approaching the precipice without articulating a vision as to what will follow …[and is] plunging toward a large-scale war against the Islamic Republic of Iran”
Iran is receiving support from China which has become dependent upon the 1.5 million barrels of oil being shipped daily. Henningsen noted that “Iran possesses advanced missile technology, including newer hypersonic generations not yet deployed, improved targeting systems capable of hitting moving naval targets, proprietary guidance systems, and Chinese-assisted navigation technology”. Despite these defenses, “it’s… clear that the Neocons and Israeli operatives in US media and politics seem determined to take America,…to war.” And this, in spite of the dire consequences, which are likely to be devastating, not only to Iran but also to Israel itself.
Former U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Chas Freeman, observes in an on-line interview, that “to be hated means that one does hateful things” and Israel’s leaders are behaving badly”.He noted that what Netanyahu means by peace is pacification [of Arab nations]. It is delusional and [shows] a complete lack of understanding of one’s enemies”. Ambassador Freeman observes that: “Israel is an apartheid state and is enabling dictatorial decisions that are not the “will of the people”. The leaders believe in their own propaganda, but they are not hated because they are Jews but because of their behavior in the destruction of Gaza as well as their targeted assassinations. https://www.juancole.com/2026/02/american-catastrophic-consequences.html
Beijing moves to contain Mossad’s expanding reach in Iran
Israeli intelligence operations inside Iran have alarmed Beijing, which saw them as a new model of intelligence warfare, prompting deeper technological, security, and strategic cooperation with Tehran.
Nadia Helmy, The Cradle, FEB 17, 2026
Chinese military experts and intelligence agencies increasingly describe Mossad’s deep infiltration into Iran as opening a “Pandora’s box” of global security risks.
From Beijing’s perspective, Israeli and US intelligence operations – particularly those expanding after 2015 and accelerating through 2025–2026 – mark the evolution of a new battlespace. Mossad’s ability to embed agents, compromise sensitive databases, disable radar networks, and facilitate precision strikes from inside Iranian territory is interpreted as a shift toward what Chinese analysts call ‘Informationized and Intelligent’ Warfare.
This represents the convergence of cyber sabotage, internal recruitment, technological penetration, and operational coordination – a hybrid model in which intelligence operations hollow out defensive infrastructure before kinetic action begins.
For China, the implications extend well beyond Iran.
Intelligence warfare as a precursor
Within Chinese security discourse, Israel’s operations in Iran are frequently cited as evidence that intelligence warfare now precedes kinetic engagement.
Military expert Fu Qianshao, a former analyst in the Chinese Air Force, characterized Mossad’s success in planting agents and disabling Iranian radar and air defense systems from within as a “new pattern of intelligence warfare.” The June 2025 Israeli strikes on the Islamic Republic, which reportedly faced minimal resistance due to compromised systems, reinforced this assessment.
Fu argued that such tactics transcend traditional battlefield engagement. Instead of confronting air defenses externally, Mossad undermined them internally – neutralizing deterrence before aircraft entered contested airspace.
Another Chinese military expert, Yan Wei, echoed this concern, emphasizing that the penetration of sensitive Iranian facilities exposed structural weaknesses rather than merely technological gaps. Legal safeguards and routine security protocols, he suggested, are insufficient against intelligence operations that exploit bureaucratic vulnerabilities and internal access points.
Professor Li Li, a Chinese expert on West Asian affairs, has pointed to Israeli cyber operations targeting research centers and infrastructure as evidence of intelligence warfare functioning as a force multiplier. Unlike conventional attacks, these operations blur the line between espionage and sabotage, complicating retaliation.
Tian Wenlin, director of the Institute of Middle Eastern Studies at Renmin University, warned that sustained intelligence incursions could pressure Tehran to accelerate its nuclear capabilities as a defensive countermeasure……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….https://thecradle.co/articles/beijing-moves-to-contain-mossads-expanding-reach-in-iran
Trump buildup for war with Iran mimics George W. Bush’s buildup for 2003 Iraq war.
Trump frames the ongoing negotiations as designed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. This despite Trump’s bragging that he completely destroyed their nuclear program with his one-off bombing last June
Walt Zlotow West Suburban Peace Coalition Glen Ellyn IL, 17 Feb 26
Back in 2002 the US demanded Iraq give up its WMD, weapons of mass destruction, ostensibly to prevent another 911 attack a year earlier. To back up its demand the US threatened attacking the Iraqi regime to safeguard the Homeland.
Along with most Americans, I fell for the line that the US would stand down due to the weapons inspectors and intelligence resources in Iraq concluding Iraq had no WMD and was not a threat to America whatsoever.
Then in August 2002, I read a report buried deep in the Chicago Tribune describing America’s massive military buildup, concluding with the strong implication that such a buildup made attack on Iraq inevitable with nothing Iraq could do to prevent it.
At that moment I knew everything the Bush administration said about the Iraqi danger was a vicious lie in service of ousting Saddam Hussein and conquering Iraq. Seven months later, contrary to all the evidence, Bush did precisely that.
I’m getting the same ominous feeling when I hear Trump bragging out his massive buildup of air and naval forces near Iran poised to attack should Iran not capitulate to Trump’s non-negotiable demands that Iran give up its missile defense resources and cease supporting its regional allies.
Trump frames the ongoing negotiations as designed to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. This despite Trump’s bragging that he completely destroyed their nuclear program with his one-off bombing last June in support of Israel’s 12 day war on Iran that utterly failed to topple the Iranian regime.
The current negotiations in Geneva have nothing to do with Iran’s nuclear weapons program since, like Iraq’s imaginary WMD program in 2002, Iran has none. Indeed, for verification Iran is willing to negotiate limited nuclear enrichment for peaceful domestic purposes; even allow inspections to verify compliance But they will never negotiate away their missile program which is their only defense against further Israeli, US attacks such as they incurred last June.
Another similarity to Bush’s illegal invasion of Iraq 23 year ago? It had nothing to do with vital US national interests. It had to do with Israeli demands that successive US administrations, bought up with Israel Lobby money, take out any Israeli rivals for Middle East hegemony.
Trump’s fealty to Israeli demands, encouraged by their near quarter billion in campaign support, fueled Trump’s blowing up Obama’s sensible 2015 Iran nuclear agreement in 2018. He lied to us then how the deal favored Iran by not ending its nuclear bomb program that did not exist. Trump is lying to us now on the urgency of destroying Iranian sovereignty which includes the right to self-defense.
But there is one huge difference between Trump’s trumped up Iranian threat likely presaging all out war today and George W. Bush’s falsified Iraqi threat in 2002. Unlike Iraq which had no defensive military means and no powerful allies to assist his defense, Iran has both.
They have thousands of missiles scattered thruout their large country capable of inflicting massive damage on US and Israeli forces. In addition they are getting defensive support from Russia and especially China in the form of intelligence resources to track approaching US bombers and provide accurate targeting information in retaliation.
History shows that sending a military armada near a pretend enemy never gets recalled. Its sole purpose is to attack and destroy based on a tissue of lies. And any lie and any ludicrous demand to negotiate an impossible deal in furtherance of war will be used to justify attack.
George W. Bush got 4,497 soldiers and 1,487 civilian contractors killed for nothing in his made up Iraq war. Trump’s march to war with Iran may make Bush’s folly pale in comparison.
The right to have nukes
by beyondnuclearinternational, https://beyondnuclearinternational.org/2026/02/11/the-right-to-have-nukes/
No country should have nuclear weapons, but the ones that do should disarm first before telling others they can’t have them, writes Linda Pentz Gunter
The trouble with telling Iran it can’t have nuclear weapons is, look who’s doing the talking. The United States, which, with more than 5,000 nuclear weapons, has the second largest inventory in the world behind Russia. And Israel, an undeclared nuclear weapons nation with anywhere from 80 to 200 bombs. Israel is actually allowed to maintain the disingenuous position of “nuclear opacity” within the UN, neither confirming nor denying its nuclear arsenal.
This is despite the fact that the UN General Assembly adopts a resolution every year calling on Israel to renounce possession of nuclear weapons and to place its nuclear facilities under international supervision, something the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs, equally disingenuously describes as “the annual three-month ‘Israel-bashing’ festival”.
Since we know that US President Trump doesn’t actually care whether or not the Iran government is shooting demonstrators in the streets, especially given he is quite happy for his own Homeland Security to do it here —albeit in not nearly as high numbers, or not yet — we must reckon with the other motivations for continuing to threaten Iran. And one of those is absolutely about stopping Iran from developing the bomb.
There is further irony here, because, unlike nuclear-armed Israel, non-nuclear armed Iran is a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). And unlike the US, Iran so far appears to have abided by its terms. Article IV — one of the major flaws of the treaty as Iran perfectly exemplifies — gives signatories the “inalienable right” to develop nuclear power as long as they don’t transition to nuclear weapons development. Article VI demands that the nuclear-armed nations pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament.
Iran could argue that it is abiding by Article IV. The US clearly cannot make the case that it is abiding in any way by Article VI. On the contrary, with the collapse last week of the New START Treaty, the last surviving nuclear arms reduction treaty between the US and Russia, both countries could now significantly ramp up their respective arsenals.
According to a statement put out last week by International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, which won the Nobel Peace Prize back in 1985, these increases could happen by uploading additional warheads on each country’s existing long-range missiles. This would mark the first increase in the sizes of their deployed nuclear arsenals in more than 35 years. According to independent estimates, Moscow and Washington could double the number of strategic deployed warheads without New START.
Iran’s nuclear facilities were seemingly pulverized by the provocative bombing raids carried out by Israel and the US last June. But they were no means completely “obliterated”, as Trump claimed. New satellite imagery suggests there is currently considerable activity at the Iranian nuclear sites, but some of these appear to be simple repairs such as the rebuilding of roofs and other structures destroyed in the attacks. There is more activity, according to analysis of the satellite images by the New York Times, at conventional missile sites, presumably in anticipation of another attack by Israel and/or the US.
Iran has and may well continue to insist it is developing its uranium enrichment capabilities for a civil nuclear program. And that could be true. Or not. The level to which it has lately been enriching uranium — to at least 60 percent and possible higher — before first Israel and then the US bombed its nuclear facilities, puts it in that gray area of weapons-usable rather than weapons-grade uranium enrichment. All this points once again the flaw in the NPT that continues to hand back the keys to the nuclear weapons lab by encouraging the development of nuclear power.
A delegation from the White House went to Oman last Friday to negotiate a new nuclear deal with Iran, even though it was Trump’s own regime back in 2018 that destroyed the perfectly workable Iran nuclear deal — known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — that had been in place up until then.
The negotiating team was led by Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. Witkoff is Trump’s Middle East Envoy but Kushner has no official position within the US government and no actual qualifications, other than an unsavory and predatory zeal about beachfront property — Iran has 5,800 km of coastline along the Caspian Sea, the Persian Gulf and Sea of Oman.
Should Iran have nuclear weapons? Of course not. But that also goes for the nine nations who do. And they should be the first to disarm before any demands are made elsewhere.
Linda Pentz Gunter is the founder of Beyond Nuclear and serves as its international specialist. Her book, No To Nuclear. Why Nuclear Power Destroys Lives, Derails Climate Progress and Provokes War, can be pre-ordered now from Pluto Press
1 This Month
5 March -Online – Reversing nuclearization:
From nuclear weapons in Belarus and NATO host countries to a European-Nuclear-Weapon Free Zone
11am-12:30pm Eastern Time USA / 5pm-6:30pm CET
of the week – Advocating for a
nuclear free beach – https://www.samuellawrencefoundation.org/
The Samuel Lawrence Foundation advocates for a Nuclear Waste Free Beach at San Onofre, join us and take action!
10 March A LIVE WEBINAR THE REAL EFFECTS OF NUCLEAR POWER
What the Industry Isn’t Telling Us
1:00 PM Mountain, 2 pm Central, 3 pm Eastern. Live on the Keepers of the Water Facebook page
18 March Webinar @ 1 PM EST: An Assessment of SMR Projects: The Case of Canada
register for the zoom:
https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_o8BIIOUvQ2ONJR1nta65DQ#/registration
of the week – STOP SMALL MODULAR REACTORS IN CANADA
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- March 2026 (37)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 