SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
centcom
'Have You Investigated Those Claims' of Civilians Killed by US in Iran? CENTCOM Chief: 'We Have Not'
With more than 1,700 civilians, including hundreds of children, reportedly killed during US-Israeli bombarding of Iran, one advocacy group said that "more pressure and oversight on these war crimes is urgently needed."
May 14, 2026
While claiming that the subject of civilian casualties is his “passion” before US lawmakers during a US Senate hearing on Thursday, the head of US Central Command was asked directly if he and his team had investigated a litany of reports about civilians being killed or maimed by US bombs in Iran. His answer? No.
Commander Adm. Brad Cooper appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee for a hearing on US Central Command (CENTCOM) and US Africa Command (AFRICOM) concerning the Trump administration's request for $1.5 trillion in military spending authorization for 2027.
During the questioning, Cooper refuted reports that US-Israeli airstrikes have hit 22 schools in Iran and raised eyebrows for his answers regarding cuts to Pentagon programs meant to mitigate harm to noncombatants.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)—who last month led the introduction of a defeated war powers resolution aimed at stopping President Donald Trump's "reckless" attack on Iran—pressed Cooper about US conduct in the war. She cited New York Times reporting that 22 schools and 17 healthcare facilities have been destroyed or damaged since Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched the illegal war of choice on February 28.
"We have regulations. We have the law of war. We have human rights obligations. We have our own targeting requirements to avoid civilian harm and death," Gillibrand said. "Have you been implementing all the laws that are required under current law to minimize civilian death?"
.@SenGillibrand presses CENTCOM Commander Cooper on the bombing of schools and hospitals in Iran.
Cooper’s response is woefully insufficient, denying that more than one such bombing took place, despite widespread documentation of bombings destroying protected civilian sites. pic.twitter.com/8gy6Zx6eg2
— NIAC (@NIACouncil) May 14, 2026
"We follow all the procedures and have gone above and beyond to, in my case, personally warn the Iranian people of several instances during conflict where they were being potentially used as human targets," the admiral said.
Asked by Gillibrand "how did we then bomb 22 schools," Cooper countered that "there is no indication that we have that has been corroborated."
The Iranian Red Crescent Society claimed last month that at least 60 students and 10 staff members were killed in US-Israeli attacks on 32 universities and 857 schools.
Pressed by the senator on "how many schools" the US has bombed, Cooper retorted that "there is one active civilian casualty investigation from the 13,629 munitions" used to attack Iran.
The admiral was presumably referring to the February 28 cruise missile strike on the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls’ elementary school in Minab, which killed 156 students and staff and wounded 95 others. Trump and senior administration officials initially denied responsibility for the massacre, but physical evidence, journalistic investigations, and a preliminary Pentagon probe indicate US culpability.
A skeptical Gillibrand repeated her question about 22 schools "and multiple hospitals" being bombed.
"There's no way that we can corroborate that," Cooper replied. "No indication of that whatsoever."
The senator asked for clarification: "There's no way you can corroborate, or no indication of it? Which one?"
Cooper answered, "No indication."
"Well, the indication is what's publicly available," Gillibrand fired back. "There is indication. Have you investigated those claims?"
The admiral replied, "We have not."
Gillibrand continued: "Why have you not? If this is a passion of yours, if you believe that the civilian casualties are not consistent with the law of war and not consistent with human rights obligations... why have you not investigated those allegations when they're publicly being made on the cover of The New York Times?"
The senator then asked how Cooper has "managed the 90% cut to the personnel who are supposed to avoid civilian targets," a reference to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's gutting of the Biden-era Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response Action Plan (CHMR-AP), which laid out a series of policy steps aimed at preventing and responding to the death and injury of noncombatants.
The plan, which was implemented after US forces killed an estimated 432,000 civilians since late 2001 during the so-called War on Terror, was skeptically welcomed for its commitment to reducing harm to noncombatants. However, Hegseth said at the outset of the Iran War that US forces would not be bound by “stupid rules of engagement" and would instead prioritize “lethality."
The Pentagon eliminated the entire civilian harm office at Joint Special Operations Command, removed related specialists from target development teams, and slashed CENTCOM's civilian harm mitigation team from 10 people to just one full-time staffer.
Cooper told Gillibrand that he would be "happy to provide any report" on the matter.
Iranian officials and human rights groups say more than 1,700 Iranian civilians have been killed by US and Israeli attacks since February 28. US and Israeli use of artificial intelligence systems to select bombing targets exponentially faster than any person has also raised concerns regarding a lack of meaningful human oversight. One former IDF officer said AI enabled a “mass assassination factory” in Gaza, where more than 250,000 Palestinians have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces since the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023.
The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) said after the exchange with Gillibrand that "Cooper’s response is woefully insufficient, denying that more than one such bombing took place, despite widespread documentation of bombings destroying protected civilian sites."
"More than 1,700 civilians, including hundreds of children, were killed in the bombardment of Iran," NIAC added. "Dozens of schools and hospitals were damaged and destroyed by the dropping of massive bombs in urban areas. More pressure and oversight on these war crimes is urgently needed."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Admin Denies That Iran Hit US Warship Entering Strait of Hormuz
One foreign policy expert urged skepticism of the administration's claim, noting its consistent pattern of "immediate, unequivocal denial, then slowly dribbling out confirmation."
May 04, 2026
The Trump administration has denied reports from Iranian media on Monday that a US Navy warship was hit in the Strait of Hormuz.
After US President Donald Trump said this weekend that the US Navy would help “guide” commercial ships through the strait, in what was referred to as "Project Freedom," an Iranian official described it as a ploy to "provoke" retaliation and pledged that any vessels attempting to navigate the waterway without authorization would be "promptly intercepted" by Iranian forces.
According to Iranian news agencies, that is just what occurred on Monday morning. The Fars News Agency, which is linked to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), said that according to local news sources, “two missiles” had made impact in an attack on a US Navy frigate that had entered the strait without permission from the Iranian government.
It said the ship “violated security protocols for transit and navigation near Jask with the intent to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, [and] came under missile attack after ignoring warnings from the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Navy.” Fars added that the ship "has been prevented from continuing its course due to these strikes and has been forced to retreat and flee the area."
In a comment to Reuters, a senior Iranian official added that it was unclear whether the warship had sustained any damage.
The Tasnim news agency published a statement from the Iranian army’s public relations department, saying that “with the decisive and swift warning from the Navy of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the entry of enemy American Zionist destroyers into the Strait of Hormuz area was prevented.”
US Central Command (CENTCOM) quickly denied the claim, posting a "fact check" on social media.
"CLAIM: Iranian state media claims that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps hit a US warship with two missiles," the post said. "TRUTH: No US Navy ships have been struck. US forces are supporting Project Freedom and enforcing the naval blockade on Iranian ports."
Another post stated that "US Navy guided-missile destroyers are currently operating in the Arabian [Persian] Gulf after transiting the Strait of Hormuz in support of Project Freedom" and that "American forces are actively assisting efforts to restore transit for commercial shipping."
It added that "as a first step, two US-flagged merchant vessels have successfully transited through the Strait of Hormuz and are safely headed on their journey."
Iran's shuttering of the Strait of Hormuz to unauthorized ships has allowed it to wreak havoc on the Western economy in retaliation for the war launched by the US and Israel at the end of February.
About 20% of the globe's seaborne oil shipments pass through the waterway, and its closure has caused global oil prices to spike, driving US gas prices to more than $4 on average and rippling inflation through the economy.
Observers of open-source marine tracking reports have said it did not show that two US-flagged merchant ships passed through the strait on Monday. However, it is possible the ships could have navigated the strait with the tracking technology disabled.
While information from the strait remains scarce, Matt Duss, a former foreign policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has said the public should remain skeptical of the Trump administration's denials given its track record.
"Watch closely," he wrote on social media. "The Trump administration's consistent pattern has been immediate, unequivocal denial, then slowly dribbling out confirmation that 'yeah, that happened, it was bad, actually very bad,' and hope coverage has already moved on, and no one notices."
As an example, he pointed to the first Trump administration's claim following the 2020 assassination of IRGC Gen. Qassem Soleimani that retaliatory attacks against the Al Asad airbase, a US military installation, had resulted in zero casualties.
“Initially, Trump claimed, ‘We suffered no casualties,’” Duss said. “In the weeks that followed, we learned that there were actually over 100 casualties." At least 109 US troops had suffered brain injuries from the strikes, according to the Pentagon.
More recently, CENTCOM initially denied claims that Iran had shot down US fighter jets in early April, claiming that "all aircraft are accounted for" when a plane had, in fact, been shot down, requiring a multi-day operation to rescue two pilots from Iranian territory.
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Evidence Bolsters Claim That US Lied About Another Iran Airstrike Massacre
Munitions experts and The New York Times say a US missile designed to inflict maximum casualties was used in a February bombing that killed 21 people, including at least five children.
Apr 11, 2026
New information published Friday by the New York Times further suggests that the US military may have lied when it tried to pin the blame for a February airstrike that killed 21 people in Iran on the Iranian government, with evidence indicating that the US carried out the attack with a new missile designed to inflict maximum casualties.
While much of the world knows about the February 28 massacre of around 175 children and staff at the Shajareh Tayyebeh girls’ elementary school in Minab—and about how President Donald Trump initially blamed Iran for the slaughter—the strike that hit a sports hall and playground in Lamerd on the same day, the first day of the war, received far less media coverage.
Munitions experts and the Times concluded that US-made Precision Strike Missiles, or PrSMs—pronounced "prism"—struck the residential area of the southern Iranian city. Developed by Lockheed Martin, PrSMs are airburst weapons, exploding above their targets and blasting 180,000 lethal tungsten pellets in every direction. Video footage of the Lamerd strike shows multiple airbursts.
Pete Hegseth's Defense Dept appears to be caught in a lie.It involves deaths of 21 people (including at least 5 children), injuring 110 in Lamerd, Iran with sports hall and school.By a U.S. missile (PrSM) never before used in combat.NYT sources include: 3 US officials!1/
[image or embed]
— Ryan Goodman (@rgoodlaw.bsky.social) April 10, 2026 at 5:48 PM
The Times verified the identities of 21 people killed in the strike. At least five victims were children, the youngest of them just 2 years old. Helma Ahmadizadeh, 10, and Elham Zaeri, 11, were attending volleyball practice at the sports hall when it was bombed. Helma survived the strike with no visible injuries. However, she told her coach that she felt something enter her body. A medical examination at a local hospital revealed a small object in her body. She subsequently died.
"A young boy, Ilia Khatami, was killed alongside his coach, Mahmoud Najaf," the newspaper said. "The Times confirmed their deaths, and the death of a second boy, Abdul Mosavar Rahmani, who was from Afghanistan."
The 2-year-old, Avina Barzegar, was mortally wounded by a small object while she was playing outside her home. Video posted on Telegram shows her being treated in a local hospital before she died.
Local officials said 100 other people were injured in the attack.
Pentagon officials previously denied US responsibility for the attack following the March 29 publication of a Times investigation that used video analysis to identify PrSMs as the missiles used in the strike. US Central Command (CENTCOM) spokesperson Capt. Tim Hawkins issued a statement on March 31 calling reports that the US carried out the attack "false" and suggesting that weapon used in the strike was an Iranian Hoveyzeh cruise missile.
The Times' latest analysis is "based on new video footage of detonations, new photo evidence of the damage, a missile-trajectory assessment, and the perspectives of multiple experts, including three US government officials."
Findings include distinctive damage patterns consistent with tungsten pellet dispersion from a PrSM airburst, the discovery of a third detonation site consistent with a PrSM, a strike trajectory indicating the missile was launched from where US forces are based, and the sports hall's proximity to an Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps base. The Minab girls' school is also located very close to an IRGC base.
Critically, Iran does not have any missiles in its arsenal that function in a similar manner to PrSMs.
“The problem is that CENTCOM chose as an alternative a very identifiable missile,” Amaël Kotlarski, who leads the weapons team at the defense intelligence firm Janes, told the Times. "And the Hoveyzeh’s distinct features aren’t seen in the video."
Shahryar Pasandideh, another military analyst consulted by the Times, said "there is no public information to suggest that Iranian cruise missiles, including the Hoveyzeh, are equipped with an airburst fuse, let alone an airburst fuse and pre-formed tungsten pellets."
After the Minab massacre, Trump claimed that Iran had somehow acquired a US Tomahawk missile and used it to blow up the school.
An earlier investigation by the BBC Verify also concluded that the Lamerd strike was carried out using US PrSM missiles.
VIDEO | According to a report from BBC Verify, video evidence and expert assessment suggest a US Precision Strike Missile (PrSM) was likely involved in an attack on a sports hall in Lamerd, southwestern Iran on 28 February. The attack killed at least 21 people, including… pic.twitter.com/alZ25dVMl6
— The Cradle (@TheCradleMedia) March 29, 2026
More than 3,000 people have been killed over 42 days of US and Israeli strikes on Iran, according to medical officials there. This figure reportedly includes over 1,300 civilians, hundreds of whom are women and children.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump: US Forces 'Striking Very Strongly' Against 70+ Targets in Syria
"Most anti-war president ever, also a winner of the FIFA Peace Prize, threatened to invade Venezuela for oil earlier this week and has now launched strikes in Syria," said one observer.
Dec 19, 2025
President Donald Trump—the self-described "most anti-war president in history"—on Friday said the US military is "striking very strongly" against Islamic State strongholds in Syria following the killing of two Iowa National Guard members and an American civilian interpreter in the Mideast nation.
"Because of ISIS’s vicious killing of brave American Patriots in Syria, whose beautiful souls I welcomed home to American soil earlier this week in a very dignified ceremony, I am hereby announcing that the United States is inflicting very serious retaliation, just as I promised, on the murderous terrorists responsible," Trump said on his Truth Social network.
"We are striking very strongly against ISIS strongholds in Syria, a place soaked in blood which has many problems, but one that has a bright future if ISIS can be eradicated," the president continued. "The Government of Syria, led by a man who is working very hard to bring Greatness back to Syria, is fully in support."
"All terrorists who are evil enough to attack Americans are hereby warned—YOU WILL BE HIT HARDER THAN YOU HAVE EVER BEEN HIT BEFORE IF YOU, IN ANY WAY, ATTACK OR THREATEN THE U.S.A.," he added.
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on X that "earlier today, US forces commenced OPERATION HAWKEYE STRIKE in Syria to eliminate ISIS fighters, infrastructure, and weapons sites in direct response to the attack on US forces that occurred on December 13th in Palmyra, Syria."
According to the Wall Street Journal, Jordanian warplanes also took part in Friday's attacks, which reportedly hit more than 70 targets in Syria.
"This is not the beginning of a war—it is a declaration of vengeance," said Hegseth. "The United States of America, under President Trump’s leadership, will never hesitate and never relent to defend our people. As we said directly following the savage attack, if you target Americans—anywhere in the world—you will spend the rest of your brief, anxious life knowing the United States will hunt you, find you, and ruthlessly kill you. Today, we hunted and we killed our enemies. Lots of them. And we will continue."
US Central Command (CENTCOM) said that one of Friday's airstrikes killed ISIS leader Abu Yusif in Dayr az Zawr province in eastern Syria.
“As stated before, the United States—working with allies and partners in the region—will not allow ISIS to take advantage of the current situation in Syria and reconstitute," CENTCOM commander Gen. Michael Erik Kurilla said in a statement. "ISIS has the intent to break out of detention the over 8,000 ISIS operatives currently being held in facilities in Syria. We will aggressively target these leaders and operatives, including those trying to conduct operations external to Syria."
During his first term, Trump followed through on his promise to "bomb the shit out of" ISIS militants in Syria and Iraq, killing thousands of civilians in a campaign launched by former President Barack Obama in 2014. Trump prematurely declared victory over ISIS in 2018.
Since then, the Biden and Trump administrations have bombed Syria, where around 1,000 US troops remain.
During his second term, Trump has ordered attacks on Iran, Somalia, Syria, Yemen, and boats allegedly transporting drugs in the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean. The president—who says he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize—has also deployed warships and thousands of troops for a possible war on Venezuela.
"Most anti-war president ever, also a winner of the FIFA Peace Prize, threatened to invade Venezuela for oil earlier this week and has now launched strikes in Syria," political commentator David Pakman said on X in response to Friday's attacks.
Some observers noted that the strikes on Syria took place on the same day that the Trump administration released some of the files related to the late convicted sex criminal and longtime former Trump friend Jeffrey Epstein.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As US Aid Shipments Begin, Gaza Pier Denounced as 'PR Move'
"It's completely absurd," said one humanitarian worker. "The solution to the problem here is obvious."
May 17, 2024
As humanitarian shipments began trickling into Gaza via a U.S.-built temporary floating pier, Palestinians and aid workers on Friday renewed criticism of what they called an expensive and largely ineffectual publicity stunt that is no substitute for a cease-fire and opening of more land crossings into the besieged coastal enclave.
U.S. Army Central Command said that "trucks carrying humanitarian assistance began moving ashore" at around 9:00 am local time Friday as part of "an ongoing, multinational effort to deliver additional aid to Palestinian civilians in Gaza via a maritime corridor."
The $320 million Trident Pier—which consists of a floating offshore barge and 1,800-foot causeway to the shore—is expected to eventually accommodate up to 150 trucks per day. According to United Nations agencies, an average of 200 trucks entered Gaza each day last month, far fewer than the prewar daily mean of more than 500 truckloads that U.S. and U.N. officials say are required to meet the needs of a population facing critical shortages of food, water, medicine, and other lifesaving supplies.
"We don't want ships. We want the border crossing to open for people to come and go. We want safety."
However, as faminegrips northern Gaza—with malnutrition and dehydration killing dozens of people, mostly children—and at least hundreds of thousands of other Palestinians starve, Israel has been accused of blocking aid from those who desperately need it and using starvation as a weapon of war.
"We don't want ships. We want the border crossing to open for people to come and go. We want safety. We want official borders," Hassan Abu Al-Kass, a forcibly displaced Palestinian man, told The New York Times on Thursday.
Al-Kass compared the pier to the humanitarian aid airdropped by U.S. and other troops over Gaza, whose officials
say that more than 20 people have been killed by the parachuting parcels, either by crushing or drowning while trying to reach offshore drops.
"Those planes, as well, that they bring here with the parachutes, and they throw food at us like dogs, like beggars, that does not work," he said. "It falls on houses. It falls on people. It brings us problems."
One unnamed humanitarian aid worker
told U.S. investigative reporter Jeremy Scahill: "It's completely absurd. The solution to the problem here is obvious and we need to end the occupation... Once the siege is lifted, humanitarian aid can roll in. A pier is a PR move."
Farhan Haq, deputy spokesperson for U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, said Thursday that "to stave off the horrors of famine, we must use the fastest and most obvious route to reach the people of Gaza—and for that, we need access by land now."
Washington Post columnist Ishaan Tharoor noted on social media Thursday that "no major humanitarian organization has asked for this pier, and most see it as a costly distraction that will do little to make a dent in meeting Gaza's overwhelming humanitarian needs."
"For that," he added, "you need a cease-fire and open border crossings and less military obstruction."
According to a report published last month, officials at the United States Agency for International Development concluded in a confidential memo to Secretary of State Antony Blinken that Israel is violating a White House directive by blocking humanitarian aid from entering Gaza. Critics pointed to the leaked memo as more evidence that the Biden administration is breaking the law by supporting Israel's assault on Gaza—which Palestinian and international officials say has killed, wounded, or left missing more than 125,000 people—with arms and diplomatic cover.
Parties to the South African-led genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice, as well as human rights groups, accuse Israel of flouting the ICJ's January 26 preliminary ruling ordering the Israeli government to prevent genocidal acts in Gaza and ensure immediate delivery of humanitarian aid. Israel rejects charges of genocide and blocking aid.
Hundreds of U.N. and other aid workers—overwhelmingly Palestinians—have also been killed or wounded by Israeli forces in Gaza since October 7. Israeli troops have been accused of deliberately attacking both humanitarian workers and Palestinians trying to receive aid, including in the February 29 "Flour Massacre," in which nearly 900 starving Gazans were killed or wounded while waiting for food distribution south of Gaza City.
Critics have slammed U.S. President Joe Biden for offering token aid to Gazans with one hand while lavishing Israel with billions of dollars of weaponry used to kill Palestinians with the other.
Earlier this month, Biden said he would stop sending bombs, artillery shells, and other arms to Israel in the event of a major invasion of Rafah, where more than a million Palestinians forcibly displaced from other parts of the embattled Gaza Strip are sheltering alongside around 280,000 local residents.
However, as Israeli air and ground attacks pound the southern city, killing civilians including 22 members of one family in a single strike, Biden—who previously implored Israel to stop its "indiscriminate bombing" of Palestinian noncombatants—informed Congress this week that his administration will soon send another $1 billion in arms and ammunition, including tank and mortar rounds, to the Israel Defense Forces.
This, despite the Biden administration last week
acknowledging "reasonable" evidence that Israel is using U.S.-supplied weapons in the commission of war crimes in Gaza, with the caveat that "we are not able to reach definitive conclusions" on the matter.
Keep ReadingShow Less
As Biden Bombs Syria and Iraq, 80 Groups Push Gaza Cease-Fire to Avert Wider War
"We urge you to prioritize diplomatic pathways to de-escalation, which must include urgently pressing for and securing a permanent cease-fire in Gaza," the groups said in a letter to the president.
Feb 02, 2024
As U.S. forces on Friday launched intense airstrikes against Syria and Iraq in retaliation for this week's deadly drone strike on an American outpost in Jordan, scores of advocacy groups urged President Joe Biden to avoid a wider Mideast war by pressing Israel for a cease-fire in Gaza.
According to U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), American warplanes struck Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) Quds Force and "affiliated militia groups" in Syria and Iraq—countries that have suffered various degrees of U.S. bombardment since 2014 and 1991, respectively.
This, after U.S. and U.K.-led airstrikes last month targeted Houthi fighters in Yemen amid attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea.
"We fear that, as tensions continue in this escalatory spiral, the U.S. could become engaged in a protracted new war that spans across the entire region."
"U.S. military forces struck more than 85 targets, with numerous aircraft to include long-range bombers flown from United States," CENTCOM said Friday. "The facilities that were struck included command and control operations, intelligence centers, rockets and missiles, unmanned aired vehicle storages, and logistics and munition supply chain facilities of militia groups and their IRGC sponsors who facilitated attacks against U.S. and coalition forces."
Anti-war voices condemned the latest bombings in the 22-year, open-ended U.S. War on Terror, during which
millions of lives have been lost and trillions of dollars spent. A coalition of 80 advocacy groups sent a letter to Biden imploring his administration to eschew war by "leading with diplomacy."
"We fear that, as tensions continue in this escalatory spiral, the U.S. could become engaged in a protracted new war that spans across the entire region," the groups wrote. "To avoid such an unacceptable outcome, we urge you to prioritize diplomatic pathways to de-escalation, which must include urgently pressing for and securing a permanent cease-fire in Gaza."
Stephen Miles, president of Win Without War—one of the signatories to the letter—said that "while these strikes come in response to the recent tragic loss of three U.S. service members, there is little reason to believe that they will be any more successful at halting the growing spread of violence across the Middle East than multiple previous rounds of similar U.S. bombing."
"Instead, the president should do everything in his power to immediately secure a cease-fire in Gaza, the fire at the core of this regional inferno, while leading robust, regional diplomacy aimed at a genuine de-escalation of violence," he continued. "More war will only put U.S. forces and people in the region at greater risk than they already are."
"Finally, we remain concerned about the clear lack of appropriate legal authorization for this prolonged military engagement," Miles added. "While the president always retains the constitutional right to engage in self-defense, planned retaliation and prolonged bombing campaigns are not self-defense."
Both Republicans and Democrats in Congress have been
demanding that Biden attack Iran in retaliation for Sunday's drone strike on the Tower 22 outpost in northeastern Jordan that killed three soldiers serving in the Army Reserve's 718th Engineer Company and wounded dozens more.
The Islamic Resistance in Iraq (IRI)—a coalition of Shia Islamist militant groups backed by Tehran—said it carried out the attack on the U.S. base. Iran denies any involvement in the strike, and the Biden administration admitted Monday that it has no proof that Tehran ordered the attack.
U.S. support for Israel's genocidal war on Gaza—which has left more than 100,000 Palestinians dead, wounded, or missing—has stoked intense outrage throughout the Muslim world. IRI warned following Sunday's strike that "if the U.S. keeps supporting Israel, there will be escalations."
"Nothing in the region is likely to de-escalate unless there is de-escalation in Gaza."
Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the letter signer Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, said Friday that "Biden's strategy appears more focused on reducing the militias' capability to strike the U.S. than reducing their interest in targeting Americans."
"This is ultimately a suboptimal strategy. It would be more effective to reduce their interest in striking against the U.S. since that would render their capacity a lesser problem," Parsi warned. "What would reduce their interest? A cease-fire in Gaza."
"But Biden is doing everything he can to avoid putting any real pressure on Israel. He is accepting significant risk to U.S. soldiers—even willing to risk a regional war—just to make sure he doesn't cross the Netanyahu government on the issue of a cease-fire," Parsi continued, referring to far-right Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
"Regardless of how Biden's campaign is choreographed and calibrated not to elicit lethal retaliations from the militias or Iran itself, there is no escaping this reality: Nothing in the region is likely to de-escalate unless there is de-escalation in Gaza," he added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Without Approval From Congress, Biden Preps 'Sustained' US Assault on Yemen
"A cease-fire in Gaza would likely end the Houthi attacks," wrote one analyst. "But Biden is choosing war instead."
Jan 22, 2024
The Biden administration is reportedly planning for a "sustained" assault on Yemen after a barrage of U.S. airstrikes in recent days failed to halt Houthi attacks on commercial shipping vessels in the Red Sea.
The Washington Post reported over the weekend that the White House "convened senior officials on Wednesday to discuss options for the way ahead" in Yemen, which has endured years of deadly U.S.-backed, Saudi-led bombing.
"Officials say they don't expect that the operation will stretch on for years like previous U.S. wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Syria," the Post added. "At the same time they acknowledge they can identify no end date or provide an estimate for when the Yemenis' military capability will be adequately diminished."
On Thursday, President Joe Biden admitted publicly that the most recent U.S. airstrikes in Yemen have not worked to deter the Houthis, who say their attacks in the Red Sea won't stop until Israel ends its assault on Gaza.
Even after conceding their ineffectiveness, Biden said the U.S. strikes on Yemen would continue. Early Saturday morning, American forces launched airstrikes targeting "a Houthi anti-ship missile that was aimed into the Gulf of Aden and was prepared to launch," the U.S. Central Command said in a statement.
The following day, CENTCOM announced the deaths of two U.S. Navy SEALs who were lost at sea after a January 11 raid targeting an unflagged ship purportedly carrying Iranian weapons to Yemen's Houthis.
There's no indication that Biden intends to seek congressional authorization for the ongoing, open-ended U.S. military campaign in Yemen, rebuffing calls from Democratic and Republican lawmakers who say the hostilities with the Houthis are unconstitutional and heighten the risk of all-out regional war. Biden formally notified Congress of the latest round of U.S. airstrikes on Yemen a day after launching them earlier this month.
Ordinary Yemenis are likely to suffer most from an indefinite U.S. military campaign; American-led strikes have already disrupted aid operations in the impoverished country.
Analysts have argued that the best way to mitigate the risk of a spiraling Middle East war is to pursue a cease-fire in Gaza, where Israeli forces have killed more than 25,000 people—mostly women and children—in less than four months. But the Biden administration has stonewalled cease-fire efforts at the United Nations Security Council, opting instead to allow a humanitarian aid resolution that is failing to deliver for starving and desperate Gazans.
"This administration is off its hinges," said the Yemeni Alliance Committee. "Biden has started an illegal war on Yemen to avoid a cease-fire in Gaza."
Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, echoed that message, writing on social media that "Biden is starting another war in the Middle East just so that Israel can continue slaughtering people in Gaza."
"A cease-fire in Gaza would likely end the Houthi attacks," Parsi wrote. "But Biden is choosing war instead."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Hillary Syria Fact Check: 'Safe Zones' Equals 'Ground Troops'
Oct 20, 2015
During the first Democratic presidential debate, the following exchange took place between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders about U.S. policy in Syria: [my emphasis]
CLINTON: ... And, to -- provide safe zones so that people are not going to have to be flooding out of Syria at the rate they are. And, I think it's important too that the United States make it very clear to Putin that it's not acceptable for him to be in Syria creating more chaos, bombing people on behalf of Assad, and we can't do that if we don't take more of a leadership position, which is what I'm advocating.
SANDERS: Well, let's understand that when we talk about Syria, you're talking about a quagmire in a quagmire. You're talking about groups of people trying to overthrow Assad, other groups of people fighting ISIS. You're talking about people who are fighting ISIS using their guns to overthrow Assad, and vice versa. I'm the former chairman of the Senate Veterans Committee, and in that capacity I learned a very powerful lesson about the cost of war, and I will do everything that I can to make sure that the United States does not get involved in another quagmire like we did in Iraq, the worst foreign policy blunder in the history of this country. We should be putting together a coalition of Arab countries who should be leading the effort. We should be supportive, but I do not support American ground troops in Syria.
CLINTON: ...Well, nobody does. Nobody does, Senator Sanders.
Hillary's claim that "nobody" supports sending US ground troops to Syria was fundamentally misleading because whoever calls for the US to establish a "safe zone" in Syria - as Hillary did in her previous utterance to which Sanders was responding - is calling for "ground troops." This fact was made clear by a well-publicized exchange in a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on September 16 between Senator John McCain, chair of the committee, and General Lloyd Austin, head of US Central Command ["CENTCOM"], in which McCain pressed General Austin to say that he favored establishing "safe zones" in Syria and General Austin refused to do so, because a "safe zone" would require a "ground force." The video of the exchange is here. The full video of the hearing is here.
MCCAIN: Would you recommend a no-fly zone in Syria?
AUSTIN: I would not recommend it at this point, sir.
MCCAIN: ... Would you recommend telling -- setting up a buffer zone in Syria where these refugees might...
AUSTIN: It will take a ground force to be able to protect the refugees if we do that, sir.
MCCAIN: Would you support a buffer zone which would then protect some of these refugees ...?
AUSTIN: I don't see the force available to be able to protect them currently, sir. So I would not recommend it at this point in time.
Whoever calls for the US to establish a "safe zone" in Syria is saying, "I agree with John McCain that we should send US ground troops to Syria." Or else they say, "I believe in calling for a policy to be implemented without supporting the means to implement it." Or else they are saying, "I believe in calling for a policy to be implemented without understanding or caring what means would be necessary to implement it." Or else they are saying: "I believe that General Austin was lying when he said that ground troops would be necessary to establish a 'safe zone.'" What are the other possibilities?
(Have you noticed how Republicans who demand that we "listen to our generals" when they ask for more troops don't seem to be interested in listening to our generals when they say "that's not going to work unless we send troops"?)
The next person you meet on the street could be forgiven for not knowing that "safe zone" = "ground troops." Not everyone watches Congressional hearings or follows them carefully in the media. But anyone who is running to be President of the United States, who is criticizing the Obama Administration for not being "tough" enough in Syria, who claims to have a magic bullet called "safe zone" to make everything wonderful in Syria that the Obama Administration could easily use if only it were not so wimpy, must concede that "safe zone" means "ground troops," so if they are calling for "safe zones," they are calling for "ground troops."
You can urge Congress to oppose the use of US ground troops in Syria here.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More Stories
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy