

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"There is still a chance to prevent another catastrophe, but that window may be closing. We cannot afford to let this war escalate further."
The Trump administration launched a new bombing attack on Iranian territory Monday night, striking Qeshm Island in the Strait of Hormuz on the eve of the US midterms amid mounting fears of a massive post-election assault.
The Wall Street Journal was first to report the strikes, which a US official characterized as a "defensive measure" in response to Iran's use of surface-to-air missiles against American forces that have been waging an illegal war of aggression against Iran since February. The Journal noted that "in one instance on Monday, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps fired a surface-to-air missile at a US jet fighter, which fired back in self-defense."
The US military did not publicly announce the attack on Qeshm Island, which came hours before American voters were set to head to the polls to decide whether President Donald Trump's party should remain in control of Congress. The Journal reported that the Trump administration has "purposefully" been keeping its recent campaign of smaller-scale strikes on Iran quiet "so as not to signal any intention of resuming major combat operations."
Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran's deputy foreign minister, said Tuesday that "Iran is prepared for any scenario" and stressed that the country "retains its right to legitimate self-defense until the military aggression has been brought to a complete and permanent end."
Last month, Trump vowed—falsely, given Monday's strikes—that the US would "not be attacking Iran at any time prior" to the midterms and that the two sides were engaged in "productive discussions."
Vice President JD Vance asserted Monday that he and Trump "both feel really good about the prospect of potentially coming to a negotiated settlement" to end the massively unpopular and destructive war with Iran.
Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council, said late Monday that "after eight months of an illegal war, there was finally some hope that a diplomatic agreement might be within reach and this war could end through negotiations rather than spiral into the violent scenarios being threatened after the midterm elections."
"But these deeply alarming revelations suggest we may be heading in precisely the opposite direction," Abdi said of the Qeshm Island strikes and other recent attacks on Iran. "Every day that Congress fails to intervene is another day this administration is allowed to wage an unauthorized war, conceal its military operations, and gamble with millions of lives. Congress must immediately demand answers, oppose further military action, and use its power to cut off funding for this unauthorized war. Americans must raise their voices and demand that their representatives act now. There is still a chance to prevent another catastrophe, but that window may be closing. We cannot afford to let this war escalate further.”
The latest US strikes came days after Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) warned that the Trump administration was considering an "insane" plan to resume major attacks on Iran following Tuesday's midterm elections.
If the plan is carried out, Murphy said, "it will lead to devastating escalation and the likely destruction of our commitment to the rule of law."
Murphy, whose remarks were based on information he and other lawmakers received during a classified briefing, did not specifically warn that Trump is considering the use of nuclear weapons against Iran. But concerns about such a grave escalation grew over the weekend after far-right commentator Tucker Carlson—who has vocally criticized the president's decision to wage war against Iran—claimed that the Trump administration "may be within days of launching a nuclear strike on Iran."
"Whether these allegations reflect serious military planning or reckless posturing, the very possibility of a US nuclear attack on Iran is an unconscionable horror," NIAC said in response.
"Congress must urgently intervene to prevent further escalation and bring an end to this devastating war before an already horrific conflict becomes an irreversible catastrophe."
US President Donald Trump, who has long sought the Nobel Peace Prize while bombing various countries, is under pressure to rule out launching a nuclear attack on Iran after former Fox News host Tucker Carlson reported Sunday night that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is pushing for one.
"The target would be Pickaxe Mountain in central Iran, where Israeli intelligence claims the Iranian government has restarted its nuclear enrichment program," Carlson wrote on social media. "No conventional weapon in the American arsenal can penetrate 300 feet of solid granite to destroy the tunnels where enrichment is supposedly taking place. The only military option is a nuclear strike."
The US midterm election is on Tuesday, and according to Carlson, "close observers say Trump is likely to decide by next weekend whether or not to use nuclear weapons. That would be November 7... To his credit, he's hesitating. At the moment, Trump is listening to his vice president, JD Vance, and to his envoy and friend Steve Witkoff, both of whom argue a deal with Iran can be made."
However, Netanyahu "is cornered and desperate," Carlson noted. "After last week's election results, he can't form a government unless Trump intervenes directly in Israeli politics and brokers a deal with other parties that gives Netanyahu 61 seats in the Knesset. Otherwise, he is out as prime minister and on his way to ignominy, investigations, and possibly jail. Netanyahu must stay close to Trump. He needs this war."
Responding to Carlson's post, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC) said that "whether these allegations reflect serious military planning or reckless posturing, the very possibility of a US nuclear attack on Iran is an unconscionable horror. After eight months of devastating war, Iranian Americans are once again being forced to wait in terror as the Trump administration reportedly weighs another catastrophic escalation at the urging of Benjamin Netanyahu."
"NIAC demands that President Trump immediately and unequivocally rule out any use of nuclear weapons against Iran," the group asserted. "Congress must urgently intervene to prevent further escalation and bring an end to this devastating war before an already horrific conflict becomes an irreversible catastrophe."
The group's policy director, Ryan Costello, stressed that such an attack "would be an unimaginable catastrophe in its own right, and the radioactive plume of a blast could extend hundreds of miles and reach major population centers, depending on yield and wind direction. Isfahan province alone, where Pickaxe is, is home to more than 5 million Iranians."
"The Trump administration would also have to consider the ramifications of breaking the nuclear taboo in a war of aggression," he continued, suggesting that the US and Israel using such weapons could spur similar action by the other nuclear-armed nations: China, France, India, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia and the United Kingdom.
Would Russian President Vladimir "abstain from using nuclear weapons in Ukraine if Trump had dropped a nuclear weapon in Iran?" Costello wondered. "It would be a new, far more dangerous world."
While people across the ideological spectrum expressed alarm, some dismissed Carlson's lengthy post.
However, Drop Site News co-founder Ryan Grim highlighted that "Tucker is extremely well sourced in the Trump administration and shouldn't be ignored if this is what he's being told," and fellow journalist Pablo Manríquez agreed.
Pushing back against one skeptic, Andrew Day, senior editor at The American Conservative, pointed out that recently "Trump threatened to 'annihilate' Iranian civilization and unleash 'military terror' not seen since World War II. Those statements are plausibly implicit nuclear threats. Now Trump is finding that conventional weapons don't force Iran's capitulation. Concern is warranted."
Iran's government was already preparing its people for a possible US nuclear attack, and last Friday, more than 200 global civil society groups implored Congress to stop Trump from using such weapons in a bid to end the illegal war that he and Netanyahu launched at the end of February.
"In recent weeks, President Trump has threatened to ‘hit Iran hard’ after the US midterm elections next week," wrote members of the Back From the Brink Coalition. "On October 15, President Trump stated that he would not use nuclear weapons against Iran. But frequent, abrupt changes of policy have become a staple feature of his presidency, and the single statement that he will not use nuclear weapons stands against a string of threats to do just that."
Even if Trump opts not to use nuclear weapons, there are mounting global concerns about his next steps. After being briefed on the administration's military schemes behind closed doors, US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) declared last week that "their plan is insane."
The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that "America's Gulf allies are steeling themselves for a heavy US bombardment of Iran that they expect to trigger a vicious cycle of retaliation against their own economic and civilian infrastructure as early as this week."
"Democrats must block Iran war funding in 2026."
As President Donald Trump and Iranian officials traded threats over the weekend, and with the Trump administration reportedly considering renewed attacks against an underground complex it claims is a nuclear site—which Iran denies—critics of the illegal US-Israeli war on the Middle Eastern country called on Democrats to take decisive action to end the conflict after the midterm elections, in which the party could take control of one or both chambers of Congress.
The nonprofit group Just Foreign Policy (JFP) was among those pointing to comments from last week by US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who said members of Congress recently attended a confidential briefing about possible strikes on Iran after the midterms—a plan whose details he called "insane."
As Common Dreams reported Friday, Iranian officials are taking steps to prepare the population for a potential US nuclear attack, which Trump has threatened multiple times since launching the war in February. He went to war with the preemptive aim of defending Israel from Iran's retaliation if the Israeli government waged an attack on its own, according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei warned the US and Israel on Saturday against renewing attacks, saying they would be met with "geographically unrestricted" retaliation. He expressed hope Sunday that "that there is rationality on the other side to prefer diplomacy to other paths."
But with government funding expiring December 11, including money for the US Department of Defense "that is illegally bombing and blockading Iranian civilians," said JFP, "Democrats can block war funding" before the new year.
"Senate Democrats must not send another dollar to [Defense Secretary Pete] Hegseth's War Department unless the US stops the illegal war that is harming 90 million Iranian civilians and 300 million US drivers," said JFP, referring to the skyrocketing gas prices that have resulted from the conflict. "No excuses. Not another dollar for this illegal war."
JFP referred to Murphy's comments at the Middle East Institute last Wednesday, where he said Democrats in Congress must "use our spending power to end the war."
"I imagine what will happen is that there will be a continuing resolution after the election, and we'll push off the budget until January or February of next year," said Murphy. "And then if Democrats are in charge, we will essentially say we want to fund the Department of Defense, but we are not going to fund the Department of Defense if it's funding this war. And so there will have to be some provision in the bill that denies any funding to be used for the continuation of a war against Iran that's making us less safe and costing billions to American citizens."
JFP emphasized that even if Democrats don't win a majority in Congress in Tuesday's elections, Democratic senators would be able to block the continuing resolution that would keep the war funded into February, because Republicans with their current majority would need seven Democrats to join them in supporting the funding.
"Democrats must block Iran war funding in 2026," said JFP. "Democrats do NOT need to win or wait. Murphy's approach here means Democrats would agree to fund the Iran war for months or years to come."
"If Democrats win a big blue wave rebuke of this patently unconstitutional war, and Trump comes out of the midterms escalating it, Democrats should move to block it and impeach him over it," said another commentator. "Voting to enable it would be a corrupt abdication."
Al Jazeera reported Sunday that Iran was continuing negotiations with the US through Qatari mediators, "but it does not have the slightest optimism about Trump’s intentions even for a moment,” according to a security source.
“We think that there may be different voices in the US, but experience has shown that the US president and his circle are succumbing to the temptations of [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and the warmongering extremists who support him,” the source said. “For this reason we are obliged to maintain our focus on being fully prepared for a decisive and punitive defense against any aggression and crime by the United States and Israel.”
As Iran's government takes steps to prepare the nation's people for a possible US nuclear attack, more than 200 global civil society groups on Friday implored Congress to act to stop President Donald Trump from using doomsday weapons to end his illegal 228-day war of choice that he's been unable to win by conventional means.
"In recent weeks, President Trump has threatened to 'hit Iran hard' after the US midterm elections next week," the groups—who are members of the Back From the Brink Coalition—said in a statement to congressional lawmakers. "On October 15, President Trump stated that he would not use nuclear weapons against Iran. But frequent, abrupt changes of policy have become a staple feature of his presidency, and the single statement that he will not use nuclear weapons stands against a string of threats to do just that."
As the statement noted:
On April 7, he declared, “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” On May 18, he posted an [artificial intelligence]-generated image of himself pushing a red button with nuclear explosions appearing on monitors behind him. On June 8, he threatened Iran, warning that “we have the ultimate alternative, hopefully never to be used again.” On September 20, he told a reporter, “My question is, if and when do I blow the entire nation up?” Speaking at the [United Nations] on September 23, he asked, “Do I annihilate the Islamic Republic, and do it quickly?”
"We cannot discount these as idle threats," the coalition stressed. "The use of even a single nuclear weapon in Iran would destroy a taboo that has held since Nagasaki, with unimaginable consequences for all humanity. The US president should not have the unchecked authority to launch nuclear war."
"We call on the United States Congress to act now to assert its constitutional role as the only branch of government empowered to declare war—and to make clear that it does not authorize or condone the use of nuclear weapons in Iran," the statement concludes.
Despite passing various authorizations for the use of military force, Congress has not declared war since World War II. Since that conflict—which ended with the US waging the only nuclear war in history—the United States has attacked dozens of nations.
The 1973 War Powers Resolution, passed as the US killed hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Laotians during the Vietnam War, was an attempt to check presidents' powers to wage war without congressional authority. However, only a small handful of war powers resolutions have been passed by the full Congress—most recently this year, ordering Trump to end hostilities against Iran—and none have succeeded in stopping any military action.
Democratic members of Congress have expressed alarm at the specter of a Trump nuclear war on Iran. Hinting at the possibility, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Thursday at the Middle East Institute in Washington, DC that he was recently briefed on "what the war plan would be if we restarted military operations" after the midterms, as threatened by the president.
"I will just say this, their plan is insane," Murphy continued. "It will lead to devastating escalation and the likely destruction of our commitment to the rule of law."
"The plan that they have developed will lead, in my view, to a prolongment and an escalation of this war that will be devastating for our security interests," he added.
Meanwhile, Iran is stepping up preparations for a resumption of US-Israeli attacks, including nuclear strikes. The government is currently holding a "Civil Defense Week" focused on "public preparedness, protecting people and national assets, and ensuring government support for the continuity of essential services," according to state-run Press TV.
Earlier this week, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC)—which is not one of the groups listed on Friday's statement—said that "Trump’s continued threats to annihilate an entire civilization and unleash even more destructive weapons are unconscionable. There is no military solution to this crisis, and another round of attacks would only deepen the suffering of civilians and risk igniting an even wider regional war."
“The Trump administration must change course and should invest in the multilateral regional diplomacy that is underway rather than continuing its destabilizing threats to renew attacks," the group continued. "Congress must also act to prevent further unauthorized military action when it returns after the upcoming election."
"There is still a path away from disaster," NIAC added, "but it requires choosing negotiations over confrontation.”
If carried out, says Sen. Chris Murphy, the attack Trump and Hegseth are plotting "will lead to devastating escalation and the likely destruction of our commitment to the rule of law."
US Sen. Chris Murphy disclosed Wednesday that he was among the members of Congress recently briefed behind closed doors on the Trump administration's discussions of a possible post-midterm assault on Iran, and he came away with a startling assessment: "Their plan is insane."
Murphy (D-Conn.), who recently traveled to Gulf countries to survey the extensive damage Iran has inflicted on American military installations in retaliation for US President Donald Trump's illegal war, said during an event hosted by the Middle East Institute that he and some of his colleagues got the chance during a classified briefing "to have a fairly detailed conversation about what the war plan would be if we restarted military operations."
Without disclosing specific details from the briefing, the senator said administration officials told lawmakers that a renewed assault would be a "short-duration plan"—a common narrative from an administration that pledged shortly after launching the war that it would be over in a matter of weeks.
"It will lead to devastating escalation and the likely destruction of our commitment to the rule of law," Murphy warned of the administration's post-election plan.
Asked to elaborate, he said that "there's been open reporting as to what we may be planning and the civilian infrastructure that we may be targeting."
"They've been asked by the president to develop a plan," Murphy continued. "The plan that they have developed will lead, in my view, to a prolongment and an escalation of this war that would be devastating for our security interests."
Watch:
Ryan Costello, policy director at the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), called Murphy's remarks "a chilling warning that underscores the need to end the Iran war immediately."
In recent days, major media outlets including The Associated Press, CNN, and The Wall Street Journal have reported that the Trump administration has notified Middle East allies of a potential new military assault on Iran following next week's elections in the US.
According to the Journal, the US "has told several Gulf Arab countries to be prepared for a short, intense military campaign" in Iran following the midterms.
Citing unnamed officials, CNN reported that "Trump has not made up his mind on what he will do after the midterms but that he appears to be leaning toward ordering major action." The outlet noted that "leaders in US Central Command and the Pentagon have been developing a wide-ranging target list, which includes Iranian energy infrastructure, military sites, and nuclear facilities."
Sina Toossi, a senior non-resident fellow at the Center for International Policy, said Thursday that he increasingly believes "some level of infrastructure warfare between the US/Israel and Iran, on a scale we haven't yet seen, is inevitable."
"With that said, I wouldn't expect such an infrastructure war to last long, or reach catastrophic levels, largely because I expect Iran would retaliate on a scale that would compel the US to stop quickly," Toossi continued. "Yet if that doesn't happen, the consequences could be disastrous for all sides. The destruction of critical regional energy infrastructure would greatly exacerbate the existing energy crisis, likely push many economies, including the US, into recession, and deal a devastating blow to the rest of Trump's presidency and his legacy."
"Whether that prospect has already deterred him, however, remains quite unclear," he added.
Trump himself has floated a possible attack on Iran while campaigning for Republicans in recent weeks. At a rally in Lubbock, Texas earlier this week, the president told a crowd of supporters: "You'll see Iran in a couple of weeks, if you don't mind."
"There is a way forward, but it can only materialize once the US administration genuinely accepts that it has no military options."
Meanwhile, US Vice President JD Vance—widely viewed as the leading choice to succeed Trump at the top of the Republican ticket in 2028—has reportedly reached out to a leading Iranian official in a bid to revive diplomatic talks.
The Journal reported on Wednesday that Vance, with Trump's approval, "sent a letter to Mohsen Rezaei, the secretary of Iran’s top security body, the Supreme National Security Council, and previously Iran’s longest-serving commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps."
"Vance is testing whether Tehran and Washington could find enough common ground to persuade Trump not to give a final order for a short, intense attack on Iran in the coming weeks," the Journal reported. (Trump, who has repeatedly threatened to "annihilate" Iran, publicly denied that he directed Vance to try to revive peace talks with Iran.)
Costello of NIAC said in a statement Thursday that "while the desire to pursue an off-ramp is positive, Trump needs to walk the walk."
"Thus far, there is little to indicate a new approach and a serious desire to end the war," said Costello. "There is no military solution to the conflict with Iran, yet Trump still seems to think there is and that he’ll get to decide when the next round of fighting pauses. These are wrong-headed and dangerous conclusions to hold."
On the Iranian side, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote in a Financial Times op-ed last week that while Tehran is "firmly committed to seeking a dignified peaceful resolution to the conflict, we are also fully prepared to defend ourselves."
"President Donald Trump entered this war on the basis of fundamentally erroneous assumptions about Iran’s fortitude. It appears that he continues to be wrongly told that our armed forces are unprepared to defend the homeland, despite all evidence to the contrary," Araghchi wrote. "To state the obvious, we have no trust whatsoever in the sincerity of the US administration’s professed desire for peace with Iran."
"Given that the White House has shown no willingness to reach an understanding on the way forward, while also threatening more violence, there is little reason to expect progress now," he added. "In spite of all this, as a career diplomat, I am obliged to do my utmost to give diplomacy a chance, even when hope of success is scant... There is a way forward, but it can only materialize once the US administration genuinely accepts that it has no military options."
The president's comments and the official cost estimate came amid reports that the US military is preparing for a new onslaught against Iran after the midterm elections.
US President Donald Trump told a crowd of his supporters on Tuesday that his illegal war of choice in Iran will end "whenever I want it to" as the conflict's official price tag reportedly jumped to $47 billion—a figure that independent analysts believe to be a dramatic underestimate.
"It can be over whenever I want it to be over," Trump said of the historically unpopular war during a rally in Texas, a week before the midterm elections. "But we have to have it end properly, with... a total statement [that] they will never have a nuclear weapon." (Iran has already said repeatedly that it would never develop nuclear weapons, including in the opening pages of the Obama-era agreement that Trump shredded during his first White House term.)
Trump's remarks came as The Hill reported that the federal government's official estimate of the Iran war's cost has jumped $3 billion since last month, rising to $47 billion.
"The biggest chunk of the cost is munition replacement at $29 billion," The Hill reported, citing a US Central Command estimate that the outlet obtained on Tuesday. "Nearly $12 billion is obligated for incremental costs of military action and another $6.1 billion to replace equipment losses, according to the estimate. Air Force’s support for deployed personnel, airlift, base, communication support, and transportation in theater costs $7.6 billion. The estimate does not include the cost to damaged US military bases in the Middle East."
When such damage—which has been far more extensive than the Pentagon has acknowledged publicly—and other factors are included, the price tag balloons. Stephen Semler, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, estimated in July that the US spent more than $103 billion in the first four months of the war, which has killed thousands of people and sent gas prices soaring.
In the US, consumers have spent an extra $146 billion on gasoline and diesel since the war's beginning in February, according to a running tracker maintained by the Watson School of International and Public Affairs at Brown University.
Trump said Tuesday that the unauthorized war's end would come "very quick," despite evidence that his administration is preparing for yet another round of heavy bombings in Iran after the midterm elections.
"The US has told several Gulf Arab countries to be prepared for a short, intense military campaign after the US midterm elections," The Wall Street Journal reported late Tuesday, citing unnamed people briefed on the conversations. "The communications through diplomatic and military channels are among a growing number of indications that the US and Israel are readying to launch a new round of heavy combat operations against Iran, risking a major escalation in hopes of degrading Tehran’s strength and pushing it toward negotiations."
"US forces in the region have been restocking their munitions, and bomber aircraft and jet fighters are preparing for strikes," the Journal added. "An additional aircraft carrier strike group and Marine expeditionary unit are also poised to join an armada of roughly 20 other warships operating in the Middle East next month, although some ships could rotate out."
The president previously said he wouldn't take any more military action in Iran until after the midterms.
When President Donald Trump landed in Florida for a Friday campaign rally, he dismissed comments from one of his own ambassadors that the US could strike Iran this weekend as part of his illegal nearly eight-month war—but once the commander-in-chief took the stage, he changed his tune, threatening more bloodshed.
In an interview with online commentator Mario Nawfal published earlier Friday, US Ambassador to Turkey Tom Barrack, who is also Trump's special envoy to Syria and Iraq, said: "Could there be a strike this weekend? Absolutely."
"The president is very clear. He's open and available and accessible to a deal. And we've been at the table for months and months and months," he continued, noting that in addition to the nuclear priorities and aiming to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the US is "in a bargain for unfreezing assets, releasing sanctions, no more kinetic engagement, [and] supplying the needed help to Israel, our ally."
Trump had said on his Truth Social platform earlier this month that "we are having productive discussions with the Islamic Republic of Iran. I want to make it clear to everybody that, while Iran is in very bad condition, both Economically and Militarily, and while the Blockade will remain in full force and effect, with Oil flowing in Record Numbers of Barrels through the Hormuz Strait (22 Million Barrels, last night alone, with not one barrel coming from, or going to, Iran!), we will not be attacking Iran at any time prior to the Midterm Elections to be held in the United States on November 3rd."
Asked about Barrack's suggestion that a US attack could come soon while on a Florida runway, and whether it meant Trump was rethinking that position, the president responded: "That was my ambassador? He's a pretty powerful man, I guess. Well, if that's the case, I don't know anything about it."
While replying to the reporter, Trump exchanged a glance with Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who giggled at the president's answer.
Once Trump was onstage at Florida Gulf Coast University's Alico Arena, he bragged about ditching the Obama administration's Iran nuclear deal, and overseeing two military operations: Midnight Hammer, the June 2025 strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, and Epic Fury, the war he and Israel launched in February, in violation of the US Constitution and international law.
"We may do another little Epic Fury, or they'll agree," Trump told the crowd. "If they're smart, they'll just say, 'Let's get down to business.' But, you know, I doubt they'll do that because perhaps they're not smart—but we did a number on them."
Trump's illegal war—which has killed thousands of people across the Middle East—and its resulting economic impact have been key topics for Democrats hoping to reclaim control of both chambers of Congress, and potentially impeach him a historic third time.
One policy analyst wrote sardonically that the administration doesn't "want to remind voters before the midterms of the mass killing of schoolchildren on the first day of Trump's glorious war."
The Pentagon is reportedly planning to withhold until after the midterm elections the completed findings of its investigation into a devastating US strike on an elementary school in southern Iran, which killed more than 150 people—including 120 children—on the first day of President Donald Trump's illegal and deeply unpopular war.
Bloomberg reported on Thursday that "top Pentagon officials have expressed their intention to hold off on releasing an internal report into the attack" on Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in Minab until after next month's midterms "at the earliest." The internal assessment is believed to have been effectively complete for months, and preliminary findings reported in early March determined that American forces hit the school with a Tomahawk missile due to "outdated" targeting information.
According to Bloomberg, Pentagon investigators "discovered that flawed intelligence, outdated imagery, and an overreliance on AI contributed to the attack," which is regarded as one of the US military's worst atrocities against civilians in decades. Trump brushed off the massacre in remarks to reporters in June, saying: "Mistakes are made. War is nasty."
Ryan Costello, policy director at the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), said in a statement that "the refusal to come clean about the attack on Minab is not just a shameful exercise to dodge accountability for a horrific war crime; it is actively risking these errors being repeated again."
"As the administration has dodged accountability on Minab and [a deadly strike on a sports hall hours later], it has engaged in further attacks that may be war crimes, including the bombing of a civilian home on Qeshm Island that killed a family and the bombing of a wedding party in Kuhestak that killed five, including two children," said Costello. "Ensuring these tragedies don’t repeat starts with accountability on Minab.”
International policy analyst Brian Finucane wrote sardonically that the Pentagon doesn't "want to remind voters before the midterms of the mass killing of schoolchildren on the first day of Trump's glorious war."
Bloomberg's reporting came as CNN published a story detailing internal US "strike plans" that include possibly dropping the so-called "mother of all bombs" on Iranian energy infrastructure.
The GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb (MOAB) is the largest nonnuclear bomb in the US arsenal. In 2017, Trump became the first US president to deploy the weapon, authorizing the military to drop it on Afghanistan.
Sina Toossi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, warned that using the bomb against Iran would risk "triggering another major escalatory spiral, potentially including Iranian attacks on critical regional energy infrastructure, with consequences for global markets and the US economy."
"This only reinforces the fundamental problem: Trump has no viable military solution to the Iran conflict," Toossi wrote. "Is he looking for one spectacular strike to project strength and declare victory? Or is he prepared to plunge the US into an even deeper, potentially endless war that could devastate the rest of his presidency, legacy, and the economy?"
Costello of NIAC said that "the Trump administration’s threats to commit war crimes in Iran cannot be normalized."
"President Trump acts on many of his threats, necessitating more urgent action to bring this illegal war of choice to a definitive end," he added.
The September 1 strike, which killed five women and children and wounded more than 70 other Iranians, is but one of several civilian massacres during Trump's illegal war of choice.
More than 70 House Democrats on Tuesday sought answers and accountability from the Pentagon regarding a likely US strike on a September wedding gathering in southern Iran that killed five civilians—all women and children—and wounded over 70 others.
In a letter to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Reps. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.), Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.), and Jason Crow (D-Colo.) led 74 lawmakers in demanding an explanation for the September 1 bombing in Kuhestak and details of what the Trump administration is doing to protect Iranian civilians.
“We demand urgent answers regarding the United States’ role in this strike, why the strike proceeded given the clear risk of significant civilian harm, and what steps the [US Department of Defense] is taking to prevent further civilian casualties in Iran,” the lawmakers wrote.
The strike occurred at approximately 9:30 pm local time while preparations were underway for the wedding of the daughter of a local fisher.
According to witnesses interviewed by The Associated Press, around 150 women and children were gathered at the Mallahi family compound. The celebration was following a regional tradition in which women and men gather separately. The bride and groom had not yet arrived, and the main celebration had not begun. A bomb struck the room where dinner would have been served.
Four initial fatalities—two women and two children—were identified by Iranian authorities and human rights groups: 50-year-old Zarkhatoun Taheri, 43-year-old Kolsoum Malahi Najandnia, 16-year-old Mohammad Mallahi, and 4-year-old Amir Mohammad Karimi. A fifth victim, 22-year-old woman Asiyeh Molainejad, died in a hospital on September 3.
Weapons experts concluded the blast was likely caused by a direct hit from a US munition. The Pentagon has not publicly accepted responsibility for the strike, which remains under investigation.
"This incident is regrettably among the latest in a string of civilian casualty incidents arising from the US-led war in Iran," the lawmakers wrote in their letter. "This includes a strike at the Shajareh Tayyebeh Elementary School in Minab, Iran, on the first day of the war that killed a reported 175 civilians, including 120 children."
The United Nations' Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Iran said it found “reasonable grounds" to believe that the Minab school strike constituted a war crime.
"While it has been reported that a preliminary investigation by the department found that the US military was responsible for the strike, over six months later the department has still not publicly acknowledged responsibility for the strike nor released the findings of its investigation," the lawmakers' letter notes.
"Similarly, reporting and independent analysis indicate that US forces were responsible for a strike at a youth sports hall in Lamerd, Iran, that killed 21 civilians, including 7 children, on February 28. While the department has denied responsibility, analysis by weapons experts found that the damage pattern is consistent with that of an American Precision Strike Missile," the lawmakers continued, referring to Lockheed Martin's next-generation surface-to-surface ballistic missile.
Hegseth, who advocates “maximum lethality” for US forces, has expressed disdain for what he called “stupid rules of engagement” designed to minimize civilian harm. He has overseen the dismantling of efforts meant to mitigate wartime harm to civilians—hundreds of thousands of whom have been killed in US-led wars during this century, according to experts.
“Maximum lethality," combined with AI-powered systems allowing for exponentially faster and more numerous target selection, has raised concerns that have been underscored by actions including US-backed Israeli massacres in Gaza and Lebanon, and US airstrikes in Iran, where tens of thousands of people have been killed or wounded during more than seven months of President Donald Trump's illegal war of choice, according to Iranian government figures.
The Washington, DC-based National Iranian American Council (NIAC) welcomed the lawmakers’ intervention, arguing that Iranian civilians must not be treated as expendable casualties of war.
“The lives of Iranian civilians cannot be treated as an acceptable cost of war,” NIAC president Jamal Abdi said in a statement. “These are families, children, and entire communities whose lives have been irreversibly altered by a military campaign that Congress never authorized."
“Credible allegations of unlawful attacks on civilians demand independent investigations, full public disclosure of the findings, and accountability for any violations of international humanitarian law,” Abdi added. “The Trump administration cannot be permitted to wage an unauthorized war in defiance of US and international law while evading responsibility for its devastating human consequences.”
The US is providing military advisers and helping the Saudis choose targets in a war that has already displaced nearly 150,000 people and put much of the country on the brink of acute food insecurity.
Yemen is spiraling back toward full-scale war after its Saudi-backed government launched a major offensive on Sunday to retake territory captured by the Iran-backed group Ansar Allah, also known as the Houthis.
President Rashad al-Alimi said the armed forces would seek to retake all Houthi-controlled territory, which is home to about 70% of Yemen's population, including the capital Sanaa. He said the offensive would continue “until the country is liberated from the grip of the terrorist militia."
Houthi officials said Saudi forces have launched 50 air and missile attacks in the last 12 hours. As al-Alimi announced the new offensive, the Houthis responded by launching ballistic missiles and drones at Saudi Aramco oil facilities, including one near Riyadh that was engulfed in flames.
Last month, the Houthis captured major strategic areas along the Red Sea coast, giving them unprecedented leverage over one of the world's busiest shipping routes and adding to the economic stranglehold Iran is asserting by restricting travel through the Strait of Hormuz in response to US-Israeli attacks.
Earlier this month, it was reported that President Donald Trump had rebuffed Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman's request for the US to launch airstrikes against the Houthis.
However, US officials told Axios on Friday that the military is providing Saudi Arabia with "everything short of direct combat, mainly intelligence and targeting data."
While the Saudis conduct a new campaign of airstrikes, Yemen's government could reportedly mobilize as many as 100,000 troops, one of the largest military buildups since the 2022 truce that halted the nation's brutal eight-year civil war.
That war, in which the US also provided extensive military support to a merciless Saudi air campaign, is estimated by the United Nations Development Program to have caused about 377,000 excess deaths by the end of 2021: 154,000 from the fighting itself and 223,000 from indirect effects such as hunger, disease, and the collapse of healthcare and basic infrastructure. An estimated 259,000 of those deaths were of children under 5.
Even before Sunday's escalation, renewed fighting was already fueling a major displacement and hunger crisis. More than 149,000 people have been driven from their homes, according to the International Organization for Migration. Meanwhile, the World Food Program says fighting has disrupted food delivery routes, placing 18.3 million Yemenis at risk of acute food insecurity.